mm, 


a 


m 


iEx  ICthrts 


SEYMOUR  DURST 


When  you  leave,  please  leave  this  book 

Because  it  has  been  said 
"Ever  thing  comes  t'  him  who  waits 

Except  a  loaned  book." 


Avery  Architectural  and  Fine  Arts  Library 
Gift  of  Seymour  B.  Durst  Old  York  Library 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2013 


http://archive.org/details/improvementsofneOOedwa 


IMPROVEMENT 

OF 

New  York  Harbor, 


1885  TO  1891. 


Compliments  of 

JOSEPH  EDWARDS. 


NEW  YORK, 
1893. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,   in  the  year  1893.  in  the  office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at 

Washington,  by 

Joseph  Edwards. 


Wynkoop  ^  Hallknbkck,  Printers, 
441-447  Pearl  St.,  New  York. 


ENGINEER  OFFICE.  U.  S.  ARMY. 


Room  F  7,  Army  Building,  39  Whitehall  Street, 

New  York,  N.  Y.,  May  3,  1893. 
Mr.  Joseph  Edwards, 

President,  The  Joseph  Edwards  Dredging  Co., 
16  Exchange  Place,  New  York  City. 

Sir — I  have  the  honor  to  state,  in  answer  to  your 
inquiry,  that  the  United  States  made,  during  the  four 
years  beginning  April,  1887,  and  terminating  February, 
1 89 1,  six  contracts  with  The  Joseph  Edwards  Dredging 
Company,  New  York  City,  for  the  improvement,  by 
hydraulic  dredging,  of  the  southern  entrance  to  New 
York  Harbor,  extending  from  the  sea  face  of  the  bar 
in  Gedney  Channel  westward  and  northward  along 
the  Main  Ship  Channel  to  and  beyond  the  northern 
entrance  to  the  Swash  Channel,  Lower  Bay. 

The  contracts  were  successfully  and  satisfactorily 
executed  by  the  use  of  a  Edwards1  Cataract  Pumps," 
installed  in  steamers,  and  the  total  quantity  of  material 
excavated  in  this  way  by  The  Joseph  Edwards  Dredg- 
ing Company  was  4,300,000  cubic  yards. 

Very  truly  yours, 

G.  L.  Gillespie, 
Lieut.-Col.,  Corps  of  Engineers. 


OECAUSE  of  having  designed  the  plant  with  which 
the  Improvement  of  New  York  Harbor  has  been 
successfully  accomplished,  as  well  as  having  had  the 
general  management  of  the  same  and  the  execution  of 
the  work  so  far  as  done  by  the  Joseph  Edwards  Dredg- 
ing Company,  I  am  receiving  various  inquiries  relating 
thereto,  from  engineers  and  others,  who  are  contemp- 
lating similar  improvements  elsewhere  ;  for  which  rea- 
son I  have  deemed  it  advisable,  as  a  means  of  facili- 
tating response  to  such  inquiries,  to  prepare  the  follow- 
ing account  of  this  Improvement,  including  the  ac- 
companying description  and  illustrations  of  the  means 
employed. 

Joseph  Edwards. 


PREFACE. 


The  following  account  of  the  Improvement  of  New 
York  Harbor  refers  briefly  to  the  necessity  which  had 
arisen  for  deeper  water  in  the  Lower  Bay ;  the  location 
and  character  ot  its  channels,  and  their  condition  be- 
fore the  undertaking  was  commenced  and  at  its  com- 
pletion ;  the  projects  recommended  by  Government  En- 
gineers to  improve  them  ;  why  dredging  was  finally 
adopted;  nature  and  magnitude  of  the  work  ;  difficulties 
encountered  and  results  attained ;  Government  appropria- 
tions made  for,  and  estimated  and  actual  cost  of  the 
Improvement;  means  and  method  of  executing  the 
work,  and  evidences  of  its  permanency  ;  by  whom  the 
work  was  successfully  performed,  and  the  various  prices 
per  cubic  yard  paid  therefor ;  together  with  a  brief 
description  of  the  plant  employed ;  and  why  the  Swash 
Channel  should  be  improved. 


.  CONTENTS. 


Page 

Preface    5 

Importance  of  the  Improvement   8 

Channels  of  New  York  Harbor   9 

Map  of  the  Lower  Bay  Showing  the  Channels   10 

Condition  of  the  Channels  before  the  Improvement  was 

Made   10 

First  Action  taken  by  the  Government  to  Improve  Them  . .  11 

Projects  Proposed  by  Government  Engineers   12 

Project  and  Recommendation  of  Col.  G.  L.  Gillespie   12 

Project  and  Recommendation  of  the  Board  of  Engineers...  15 
Permanency  of  the  Improvement  Tested  as  the  Work  Pro- 
gressed  16 

Government  Appropriations  for  the  Improvement   18 

Its  Estimated  Cost  by  Contraction  Supplemented  by  Dredg- 
ing  18 

What  the  Improvement  has  Actually  Cost   19 

Saving  to  the  Government  by  Means  of  Dredging   20 

Difference  between  amount  of  Material  Contractors  Were 
Paid  for  Removing  and  amount  of  Channel  Space  Ob- 
tained   20 

By  Whom  the  Work  was  Done   21 

Average  Prices  Paid  Different  Contractors,  and  General 

Average  Price   21 

Tabular  Statement  of  Contracts  Taken  and  Work  Done  by 

the  Joseph  Edwards  Dredging  Co   22 

Tabular  Statement  of  Contracts  Taken  and  Work  Done  by 

other  Contractors   22 

Tabular  Statement  Embracing  Contracts,  Work  Done,  etc., 

of  all  Contractors   23 

Time  Taken  to  Execute  the  Improvement   24 

Nature  of  the  Material,  and  Amount  Handled  Compared 

With  Amounts  Contractors  Were  Paid  for  Removing.  24 


7 


Page 


Magnitude  of  the  Undertaking   25 

How  the  Work  was  Done,  or  the  System  of  Dredging  Em- 
ployed   25 

Relating  to  Difficulties  Encountered   26 

Government  Engineers  in  Charge   29 

Harmonius  Relations  Between  Engineers  and  Contractors.  .  29 

The  Pumps  the  Vital  Parts  of  the  Plant   30 

Special  Evidence  of  the  Capacity  of  the  Edwards  Cataract 

Pump   30 

Advantages  of  Pump-Dredging  over  Other  Systems   34 

Outline  Description  of  the  Plant   34 

Method  of  Working  the  Dredging  Steamers   38 

Special  Features  of  the  Pump   40 

Special  Features  of  the  Drags  and  Suction  Pipes,  and  Their 

Connections  With  the  Pumps  and  Ships   47 

Reasons  why  the  Swash  Channel  of  New  York  Harbor 

Should  be  Improved   54 

Facility  With  Which  it  Could  be  Improved   54 

Certainty  of  the  Permanency  of  its  Improvement  ...  54 

Advantages  of  its  Position  and  Direction   57 

Its   Economical   Advantages  Over   the  Main  Ship 

Channel   58 

Necessity  of  its  Improvement   58 

Why  the  Main  Ship  Channel  has  Been  Heretofore 

Employed   59 

Why  the  Swash  Channel  was  not  Improved   60 

Explanation  of  Plates   62 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  IMPROVEMENT. 


When  it  is  considered  that  the  City  of  New  York,  with  its  adjacent 
cities,  is  soon  to  become,  if  it  is  not  already  the  greatest  commercial  centre 
of  the  world,  and  that  its  social  as  well  as  business  relations  with  all 
nations  is  rapidly  increasing,  it  is  evident  that  nothing  can  be  of  more 
importance  to  the  interest,  not  only  of  the  City  of  New  York,  but  of  the 
whole  country,  than  an  ample  water-way  between  its  docks  and  the  ocean, 
of  such  depth  and  width  that  the  largest  ships  of  these  and  future  times 
may  pass  into  and  out  of  its  harbor,  at  all  states  of  the  tide,  as  safely  and 
freely  as  ferry  boats  are  run  on  its  surrounding  bays  and  rivers. 

Referring  to  the  importance  of  the  Improvement,  Col.  McFarland,  in 
his  report  for  1887,  says  : 

"  At  this  port  two-thirds  of  the  merchandise  imported  into  the  United 
States  are  received,  and  two-thirds  of  the  import  duties  are  collected. 
From  this  port  are  sent  out  one-half  of  the  domestic  products  of  the 
country  which  are  exported,  and  here  one-half  of  the  foreign  tonnage 
trading  with  the  United  States  enters.  Three-quarters  of  the  passengers 
travelling  between  the  United  States  and  foreign  countries  come  and  go 
by  way  of  New  York,  and  three- fifths  of  all  emigration  land  at  Castle 
Garden. 

"  The  increase  of  the  population  of  this  great  centre  of  life  and  in- 
dustry has  been  very  rapid  for  the  last  forty  years.  From  1840  to  1850 
the  increase,  as  shown  by  the  census  returns,  was  86  per  cent. ;  from  1850 
to  i860,  68  per  cent.;  from  i860  to  1870,  29  per  cent.;  from  1870  to 
1880,  34  per  cent.  At  this  rate  in  fifty  years  more  the  population  of 
the  City  of  New  York,  with  its  suburbs,  will  become  not  less  than  8,000,- 
000." 

Relating  to  the  importance  of  the  Improvement,  Col.  Gillespie  ac- 
companied his  report  for  1885  with  Commercial  Statistics,  obtained  by 
him  from  the  Collector  of  the  Port.    The  report  says  : 

"The  following  is  a  copy  of  letter  received  from  the  collector  of 
customs,  port  of  New  York,  furnishing  statistics  with  reference  to  the 
commerce  of  the  harbor. 


9 


"  Custom  House,  New  York  City,  ) 
Collector's  Office,  July  25,  1885.  ) 

"  Sir  : — As  requested  in  your  favor  of  the  3d  instant,  it  gives  me 
pleasure  to  furnish  the  statistical  information  you  desire  for  the  fiscal  year 


ending  June  30,  1885  : 

Total  receipts  from  all  sources   $126,183,873.57 

Value  of  imports   380,075,748.00 

Value  of  imports  for  interior  ports   16,833,562.00 

Value  of  imports  in  transit   16,052,183.00 

Value  of  domestic  exports   334,729,775.00 

Value  of  foreign  exports   9,796,534.00 

Value  of  merchandise  in  bond  June  30   21,485,083.00 

Value  of  specie  (imports)   6,314,264.00 

Value  of  specie  (exports)   14,656,718.00 

Tonnage. 

Foreign  vessels  entered,  4,130   4,729,283 

Foreign  vessels  cleared,  4,031   4,670,360 

American  vessels  from  foreign  ports,  1. 691 ... .  930,444 

American  vessels  for  foreign  ports,  1,273   77°>io5 

Coastwise  vessels  entered,  1,913   1,761,348 

Coastwise  vessels  cleared,  3,076   2,280,063 


Very  respectfully, 

E.  S.  Hedden,  Collector. 

Lieut.  Col.  G.  L.  Gillespie, 

U.  S.  Engineer  Officer 

Channels  of  New  York  Harbor. 

To  afford  a  clear  understanding,  and  facilitate  the  explanation  of  the 
character  and  relative  position  of  the  several  channels  of  New  York 
Harbor  below  the  Narrows,  and  the  work  performed  on  them,  careful 
inspection  should  be  made  of  the  following  Map,  which  was  prepared 
from  a  special  survey  made  by  Col.  G.  L.  Gillespie,  Corps  of  U.  S. 
Engineers,  by  direction  of  the  Government  (in  1884),  with  reference  to 
this  improvement — the  figures,  showing  the  soundings,  having  been 
changed  to  correspond  with  the  depth  and  width  of  the  channels  as  now 
improved,  and  the  location  of  the  work  being  designated  by  checked 
lines.    (The  Swash  Channel  is  shown  by  the  blue  tint.) 

To  describe  the  channels  and  point  out  their  location,  as  well  as  to 


IO 

give  a  general  description  of  the  Lower  Bay,  we  quote  from  Col.  Gilles- 
pie's Report  of  1890,  as  follows  : 

"  The  Lower  Bay  is  a  large  tidal  basin,  with  an  area  of  about  100 
square  miles. 

"The  distance  by  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  from  the  Battery  at  New 
York  to  30  foot  soundings  outside  of  the  bar  of  Gedney's  Channel  is  22 
miles,  and  by  the  Swash  Channel  it  is  18  miles,  or  from  the  Narrows  15 
and  11  miles  respectively. 

"  From  the  northeast  around  by  the  east  to  the  southeast  the  Lower 
Bay  is  open  to  the  full  sweep  of  the  Atlantic  Ocean. 

"  From  the  Narrows  to  the  northern  point  of  Sandy  Hook  is  about  9 
miles,  but  the  shortest  distance  across  the  bay,  from  the  point  of  the 
Hook  to  Coney  Island,  is  7  miles. 

"  Below  the  Narrows  there  is  one  main  channel  known  as  the  Main 
Ship  Channel,  running  southward  to  a  point  about  1  mile  west  of  the 
upper  end  of  Sandy  Hook :  thence  turning  northward  and  eastward  for  4 
miles  to  the  head  of  Gedney's  Channel,  and  thence  through  Gedney's 
Channel  east  to  deep  water  of  the  Ocean. 

"  Gedney's  Channel  is  the  main  channel  across  the  Ocean  Bar,  lying 
at  the  entrance  to  New  York  Harbor,  about  3  miles  outside  of  Sandy 
Hook,  and  east  by  north  from  it. 

"  The  Swash  Channel  is  really  a  cut-off  from  the  Main  Ship  Channel, 
leaving  it  about  6  miles  below  the  Narrows,  and  joining  it  again  at  the 
Hook,  western  end  of  Gedney's  Channel. 

"  Lying  northward  of  the  above  described  channels,  and  extending 
eastward,  are  three  other  lesser  channels,  the  "  Coney  Island  "  (which  is 
used  only  by  local  excursion  boats  and  small  sailing  vessels),  the  "  Four- 
teen Foot,"  and  the  "  East  Channels  " — for  location  and  relative  position 
of  which  see  Map,  page  9." 

Relating  to  the  depths  of  water  in  the  L'pper  Bay,  the  report  states : 

"  From  the  Narrows  northward  to  New  York  City  there  is  no  water 
less  than  6  fathoms  (36  feet)  deep  in  the  main  channel." 

Condition  of  the  Improved  Channels  Before  the  Improve- 
ment was  Made. 

Col.  G.  L.  Gillespie,  in  his  report  for  1890,  says  : 

"  Before  the  improvement  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel  into  New  York 
Harbor  was  undertaken  by  the  United  States,  it  was  obstructed  by  four 
shoals  as  follows  : 


1 1 


"  First.  The  outer  bar,  about  4,000  feet  wide,  the  channel  across 
which  is  known  as  Gedney's  Channel,  where  there  were  depths  23.7  feet 
in  mid-channel  and  22.3  feet  in  the  southern  half. 

"  Second.  The  shoal  at  the  mouth  of  the  Swash  Channel,  about  4,000 
feet  wide,  where  the  depth  was  24.3. 

"  The  channel  across  this  shoal  has  been  named  the  Bayside  Channel. 

"  Third.  The  shoal  northwest  of  Sandy  Hook,  about  2,000  feet  wide, 
on  which  the  least  depth  was  26.2  feet. 

"  Fourth.  The  shoal  in  the  Main  Ship  Channel  in  the  Lower  Bay,  west 
of  Flynn's  Knoll,  nearly  three  miles  long,  on  the  crest  of  which  the  depth 
was  only  23.9  feet  in  mid-channel,  with  depth  of  22.6  feet  within  a  few 
hundred  feet  of  the  mid-channel  range. 

"  A  large  proportion  of  the  vast  commerce  of  the  port,  which  is  carried 
on  in  vessels  of  great  draught,  could  only  cross  these  channels  at,  or  near, 
high  water."' 

Referring  to  the  condition  of  the  channels  before  the  improvement 
was  made,  Col.  McFarland  in  his  report  of  1886,  says  : 

"  Col.  Gillespie,  in  1884,  reported  that  the  deepest  draught  vessels  that 
had  ever  entered  New  York  Harbor  was  the  Spanish  frigate  Xumancia, 
which  drew  28  feet  8  inches,  but  that  she  had  to  wait  for  a  spring  tide  to 
cross  the  bar. 

"  The  minimum  depth  of  water  in  the  Main  Ship  Channel  at  mean 
low  water  in  February,  1886,  was  23.3  feet,  to  which  must  be  added  4.8 
feet  for  mean  rise  of  tide,  which  would  give  a  minimum  depth  of  28.1 
feet  at  mean  high  water,  or  only  one-tenth  of  a  foot  more  than  the  draught 
of  the  largest  ocean  steamers  at  present. 

"  Slack  water  at  Sandy  Hook  averages  about  40  minutes,  so  that  the 
vessels  of  deep  draught  have  only  40  minutes  in  which-to  cross  the  bar  in 
Gedney's  Channel,  and  to  pass  the  Knolls,  seven  miles  above  it. 

"  It  is  common  to  see  vessels  passing  over  the  bar  with  a  wake  500  to 
1,000  feet  long  behind  them  of  material  churned  up  from  the  bottom  by 
their  propeller  blades. 

"  Thirty  feet  at  mean  low  water  appears  to  be  the  depth  which  is  re- 
quired to  enable  the  largest  ocean  steamers  to  come  in  with  two  feet  to 
spare  below  their  bottom." 

First  Action  taken  by  the  Government  to  Improve 
New  York  Harbor. 

Though  the  need  of  deeper  channels  in  New  York  Harbor  had  been 
yearly  and  rapidly  increasing,  and  had  been  frequently  agitated  by  the 


12 


Commercial  Bodies  of  New  York,  and  by  them  the  Government  from 
time  to  time  had  been  solicited  to  provide  increased  facilities  for  entering 
the  port  of  New  York,  yet  it  was  not  until  1884  that  the  Government  con- 
cluded to  practically  consider  the  subject. 

"Up  to  July  5,  1884,  no  money  had  been  appropriated  for  the  im- 
provent  of  the  Lower  Bay  and  its  channels,  and  no  work  had  been 
done.  But  on  that  date,  without  any  preliminary  examination,  survey 
or  report,  an  appropriation  of  $200,000  was  made  by  Congress  for  deep- 
ening Gedney's  Channel,  New  York  Harbor." 

At  this  time  the  Engineer  in  charge,  Col.  G.  L.  Gillespie,  "was 
authorized  and  directed  to  make  a  survey  of  the  lower  harbor  from  the 
eastern  end  of  Coney  Island  to  Sandy  Hook,  with  a  view  of  determining 
the  most  feasible  plan  of  improvement.  The  survey  was  begun  in  August 
and  completed  in  November,  1884.  and  transmitted  to  the  Chief  of 
Engineers,  December  6,  1884." 

Projects  Proposed  by  Government  Engineers. 

When  the  improvement  of  New  York  Harbor  thus  came  to  be  prac- 
tically considered  by  the  Government,  in  1884,  by  appropriating 
$200,000,  directing  a  survey  to  be  made  and  calling  for  a  report,  the 
problem  then  to  be  solved  by  its  engineers  related  to  the  method  to  be 
adopted,  which,  as  far  as  could  be  determined  without  experiment,  would 
best  attain  the  desired  results.  This  problem  involved  several  consider- 
ations bearing  upon  whatever  plan  might  be  projected : 

First.  The  probability  of  successfully  obtaining  the  required  depth  of 
water. 

Second.  The  probabilitv  of  permanency  of  deeper  water  after  the 
completion  of  the  work. 

Third.    The  relative  cost  of  the  different  plans. 

Project  and  Recommendation  of  Col.  G.  L.  Gillespie. 

Col.  Gillespie  accompanied  the  report  of  his  survey,  above  mentioned, 
with  various  observations  relating  to  what  he  found  to  be  the  condition 
of  the  channels  as  compared  with  their  condition  at  previous  times; 
velocity  of  currents,  and  character  of  material  found  in  the  different 
channels;  and  various  other  important  information  relating  to  the  pro- 
posed improvement ;  together  with  his  project  for  improving  the  channels, 
and  the  estimated  cost,  as  will  appear  from  the  following  extracts  from 
his  report  for  1885  : 


!3 


"The  act  of  July  5,  1884,  makes  a  specific  appropriation  for  the 
deepening  of  Gedney's  Channel,  and  this  project,  therefore,  is  limited  to 
that  channel. 

"  The  methods  usually  adopted  for  deepening  a  channel  are  by  con- 
traction or  by  removal  of  material  by  steam  dredges." 

Referring  to  contraction  by  constructing  a  stone  dike  to  spring  from 
Coney  Island  and  extend  several  miles  toward  Sandy  Hook,  and 
strengthening  Sandy  Hook,  to  prevent  it  being  washed  away,  Col. 
Gillespie  says  : 

"  Before  considering  such  a  project,  it  would  be  well  to  try  the  experi- 
ment of  deepefiing  the  channels  across  the  bar  by  dredging,  which  has  been 
so  successful,  by  report,  at  the  mouth  of  the  Tyne,  and  at  other  ports  in 
England,  where  the  dredged  channels  have  been  in  the  Open  Sea,  and 
when  improved,  have  been  self-maintaining. 

"  If  the  experiment  fails  here,  then  the  composition  and  nature  of  all 
the  shoals  should  be  accurately  determined  by  deer)  borings  ;  the  action 
of  the  currents  definitely  learned,  and  the  method  of  contraction  studied. 

"  The  project  which  I  submit  for  present  consideration,  then,  is  to  open  a 
channel  through  the  shingle  shoal  lying  across  the  western  entrance  to  Ged- 
nefs  Channel,  between  the  30-foot  curves,  low  stage,  by  dredging ;  by  any 
other  method  provided  for  the  raising  of  the  obstructing  material  and 
carrying  it  elsewhere  to  an  assigned  place  of  deposit,  or  by  any  well 
developed  plan  of  removal  by  artificial  currents. 

"The  proposed  cut  will  extend  along  the  axis  of  the  channel  for  an 
approximate  distance  of  4,000  feet,  will  be  1,000  feet  wide,  and  will  carry 
30  feet  at  mean  low  stage. 

"  The  maximum  depth  of  cutting  will  be  6T5¥  feet,  and  the  amount 
of  material  required  to  be  removed  will  be  700,000  cubic  yards  measured 
in  place. 

"  I  do  not  know  that  the  cut,  once  opened,  will  be  self-maintaining, 
but  the  present  appropriation  being  small,  it  is  well  enough  to  experiment 
with  it,  and  if  the  experiment  is  moderately  successful,  the  use  of  large 
sums  for  contraction  by  stone  structures  may  be  avoided,  and  the  annual 
appropriations  for  maintenance  may  be  placed  at  comparatively  low 
figures. 

"  There  is  a  shoal  in  the  main  channel,  west  of  Flynn's  Knoll,  2  miles 
(approximately)  wide,  with  only  25  to  25^  feet  deep,  mean  low  water. 
To  deepen  the  channel  there  to  30  feet  mean  low  water  will  require  an 
improvement  similar  to  that  in  Gedney's  Channel;  but,  as  it  is  inside  of 
the  bar,  and  there  is  a  safe  and  deep  anchorage  for  vessels  near  the 
Hook,  the  improvement  is  not  so  urgent  as  in  the  latter  channel ;  still, 
there  are  other  considerations  which  make  it  highly  important  that  this 


14 


shoal  should  be  removed  simultaneously  with  the  improvement  on  the 
bar." 

COST  OF  THE  IMPROVEMENT. 

u  Gednefs  Channel : 

Channel  1,000  feet  wide,  30  feet  mean  low  water,  700,000 


cubic  yards  at  50  cents   $350,000 

Channel  1,000  feet  wide,  28  feet  mean  low  water,  385.000 

cubic  yards  at  50  cents   192,500 

Channel  1,500  feet  wide,  27  feet  mean  low  water,  367,000 

cubic  yards  at  50  cents    183,500 

Channel  1,000  feet  wide,  27  feet  mean  low  water,  200,000 

cubic  yards  at  50  cents   100,000 

Channel  800  feet  wide,  27  feet  mean  low  water,  146,000 

cubic  yards  at  50  cents .....  .   73,000 

"  Main  Channel,  West  of  Flynrts  Knoll : 

Channel  1,000  feet  wide,  30  feet  mean  low  water,  1,550,000 

cubic  yards  at  40  cents   $620,000 

Channel  1.000  feet  wide,  28  feet  mean  low  water,  794,000 

cubic  yards  at  40  cents   317,600 

Channel  1,500  feet  wide,  27  feet  mean  low  water,  738,000 

cubic  yards  at  40  cents   295,200 

Channel  1,000  feet  wide,  27  feet  mean  low  water,  467,000 

cubic  yards  at  40  cents   186,800 

Channel  800  feet  wide,  27  feet  mean  low  water,  373,000 

cubic  yards  at  40  cents   149,200 

RECAPITULATION. 

Improving  Gedney's  Channel  for  30  feet,  mean  low  water  $350,000 

Improving  main  Channel  for  30  feet,  mean  low  water. .   .  620,000 


Total   970,000 


"  No  allowance  has  been  made  in  the  above  computations  for  irregu- 
larities in  cutting,  or  for  increase  in  bulk  should  the  material  be  measured 
in  scows.  This  increase  would  amount  probably  to  30  per  cent,  for  the 
28  and  30  feet  depths,  and  to  about  50  per  cent,  for  the  27  feet  depths. 

u  The  least  width  for  a  conveniently  navigable  channel,  wrhere  cross- 
currents exist,  for  the  largest  class  of  vessels,  is  800  to  1,000  feet. 

"  I  recommend  that  the  available  funds  be  applied  toward  the  open- 
ing of  the  30  foot  channel,  by  dredging,  for  a  width  dependent  upon  the 
cost  of  removal  of  material,  and  the  work  be  done  by  contract  after 
soliciting  sealed  proposals  by  public  advertisement  in  the  usual  way. 

"  I  also  recommend  that  Congress  be  asked  to  make  an  additional  ap- 
propriation of  $770,000  this  session  to  complete  the  improvement  proposed 


*5 

both  for  Gedney's  Channel  and  for  the  main  channel  on  the  inside,  or  for 
application  toward  the  commencement  of  permanent  works  of  construc- 
tion, if  such  works  be  found  necessary. 

"  It  is  my  belief  that  if  before  any  work  is  done  a  sufficient  time  be 
given  to  the  contractors  to  prepare  an  extensive  plant,  suitable  for  mak- 
ing the  improvement  rapidly,  the  money  appropriated  will  be  most 
judiciously  and  advantageously  expended,  and  that  it  may  reasonably  be 
expected  that  the  channel  will,  after  the  proposed  improvement  has  been 
effected,  be  self-sustaining  for  many  years." 

It  seems  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  above  described  project, 
suggested  and  recommended  by  Col.  Gillespie,  had  the  effect  to  determine 
the  method  of  improving  New  York  Harbor ;  and  though  it  was  at  first 
only  experimentally  adopted,  yet  by  its  final  and  complete  execution  it 
has  resulted  in  preventing  the  outlay  of  a  large  sum  for  contraction-works, 
and  avoiding  restrictions  to  the  navigation  of  the  Lower  Bay  that  might 
have  resulted  therefrom,  as  well  as  consummating  the  desired  results. 

Project  and  Recommendation  of  the  Board  of  Engineers. 

Col.  Gillespie's  project  and  recommendation  was  submitted,  by  the 
Chief  of  Engineers,  to  the  Board  of  Engineers,  December  10,  1884. 
The  Board  submitted  its  report  thereon  December  23,  1884,  which  is  too 
extended  to  be  quoted  here,  except  its  conclusions,  which,  briefly  stated, 
were : — 

"  The  Board  recommends  as  a  general  plan  for  improving  the  entrance 
to  New  York  Harbor,  so  as  to  give  30  feet  from  New  York  to  the  ocean, 
the  construction  of  a  stone  dike  running  about  S.  S.  E.  from  Coney  Island 
to  such  distance  as  shall  be  found  necessary,  and  probably  not  less  than  four 
miles;  the  protection  of  the  head  of  Sandy  Hook;  and  the  dredging  of 
a  30  foot  channel  from  the  deep  water  near  Sandy  Hook  to  deep  water 
below  the  Narrows;  also  the  immediate  dredging  of  the  channel  1,000 
feet  wide  and  28  feet  deep  through  the  shoal  west  of  Flynn's  Knoll,  as 
soon  as  Congress  shall  furnish  the  funds ;  also  that  the  existing  appro- 
priation be  applied  to  dredging  Gedney's  Channel  to  a  depth  of  28 
feet." 

As  the  first  appropriation  (the  $200,000  granted  July  5,  1884)  was 
made  for  dredging  in  Gedney's  Channel,  this  money  could  not  be  applied 
to  the  general  improvement  in  any  other  way ;  therefore,  dredging  on 
this  channel  was  commenced  before  the  project  for  contraction  was 
either  adopted  or  abandoned.  And  before  the  question  of  contraction 
for  the  improvement  of  Gedney's  Channel,  at  the  estimated  cost  of 


j6 

$4,500,000,  was  wholly  dismissed,  the  work  that  in  the  meantime  had 
been  done  and  was  being  done  on  this  channel  foreshadowed  the  pos- 
sibility of  accomplishing  the  entire  contemplated  improvement  by  means 
of  dredging  alone.  Therefore,  the  Board  of  Engineers  recommended 
that  the  dredging  be  further  extended,  and  that  if  the  results  continued 
to  be  favorable  and  altogether  successful,  the  delay  and  cost  of  con- 
structing contraction-works  might  be  avoided. 

At  the  beginning  of  November,  1886,  303,869  cubic  yards  had  been 
dredged  from  this  channel,  and  some  doubt  existing  as  to  whether  the 
shitting  of  sand  during  winter  storms  would  not  again  fill  up  the  cut 
arrangements  were  made  for  determining  this  question  by  having  com- 
parative surveys  made ;  one  of  which  was  taken  between  the  17th  of 
October  and  2d  of  November,  1886,  and  the  other  in  May  and  June 
of  1887.  The  surveys  were  made  with  the  best  means,  and  greatest 
possible  accuracy. 

The  permanency  of  the  results  of  dredging,  as  shown  by  these  com- 
parative surveys,  will  be  seen  by  the  following  quotations  relating  thereto 
from  Col.  McFarland's  Report  of  1887  : 

"  The  depths  were  found  to  agree  almost  exactly  with  the  depths 
given  by  the  survey  made  in  the  fall,  the  only  difference  being  that  those 
obtained  in  the  spring  were  found  to  be  one  or  two  tenths  of  a  foot 
greater. 

"  This  is  a  very  satisfactory  result,  for  it  shows  conclusively  that  for 
eight  months,  including  the  stormiest  season  of  the  year,  the  channel  has 
maintained  the  increased  depth  which  it  had  received ;  and  it  leads  to 
the  belief  that  the  still  greater  depth  which  the  act  of  Congress  calls  for 
may  be  equally  maintained  when  once  secured." 


Permanency  of  the  Improvement  Tested  as  the  Work 

Progressed. 

As  the  work  progressed,  from  year  to  year,  various  careful  comparative 
surveys  were  made  to  ascertain  if  or  not  the  depths  of  water  attained 
were  being  maintained,  and  if  not,  to  what  extent  they  had  been  dimin- 
ished. 

These  surveys  invariably  proved  that  while  the  depth  of  water  had 
in  no  part  of  the  channels  become  less,  it  had  in  some  places  become  a 
trifle  greater. 


i7 


For  results  01  the  first  two  of  these  comparative  surveys,  see  page  16. 
Relating  to  other  test  surveys  the  report  for  1888  says : 

Surveys  made  in  December,  1887,  and  May,  1888,  show  that  no 
shoaling  whatever  had  taken  place  on  the  bar  in  the  interval  of  six 
months,  during  which  no  dredging  was  done  there.  As  a  like  comparison 
was  made  a  year  ago,  with  precisely  the  same  result,  there  are  good 
grounds  for  expecting  that  the  dredged  channel  across  the  bar  may  main- 
tain its  new  dimensions  by  the  action  of  the  current  alone." 

The  report  of  the  Engineers  for  1889,  says  : 

"  A  survey  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel  from  below  the  Narrows  out 
along  the  improved  channel  to  deep  water  beyond  the  bar,  was  made  in 
June,  1889,  and  the  resulting  charts  will  soon  be  published  for  the  infor- 
mation of  mariners.  These  charts,  which  were  first  made  in  December, 
1888,  in  separate  sheets,  covering  the  several  sections  of  the  improved 
channel,  have  been  eagerly  sought  after  by  all  the  steamship  companies 
of  the  port,  to  whom  they  have  been  liberally  distributed  free  of 
charge. 

"  The  survey  just  completed  shows  that  the  improvement  is  in  the 
most  gratifying  condition.  There  is  no  indication  that  Gedney's  Channel 
has  shoaled  since  the  last  survey,  of  December  29,  1888,  when  the  least 
depth  in  the  channel  width  of  500  feet  was  30  feet  at  mean  low  water.  The 
Bayside  Channel  is  entirely  free  from  the  small  shoal  spots  which  formerly 
existed  in  it,  at  or  near  the  eastern  entrance  to  the  Swash  Channel,  and 
the  line  of  deep  water  is  now  direct  from  the  western  entrance  to  Gedney's 
Channel,  westward  to  the  southern  entrance  to  Main  Ship  Channel  op- 
posite to  Red  Buoy  No.  10,  and  the  least  depth  throughout  the  entire 
width  of  1,000  feet  is  30  feet  at  mean  low  water. 

"  The  Main  Ship  Channel,  west  of  Flynn's  Knoll,  from  Buoy  No.  10, 
the  northern  limit  of  the  30  foot  curve  in  Sandy  Hook  Bay,  to  Buoy  No. 
12,  the  extreme  northern  limit  of  the  present  improvement,  has  29  feet 
at  mean  low  water  between  parallel  lines  50  feet  and  500  feet,  respect- 
ively, west  of  the  line  of  buoys  C  2  and  C  6.  The  30  foot  channel  be- 
tween the  same  extreme  north  and  south  points  has  an  average  width  of 
350  feet. 

"  When  it  is  remembered  that  before  this  improvement  began,  in  1885, 
the  least  depth  in  Gedney's  Channel  was  22.3  feet,  in  Bayside  Channel 
24.3  feet,  and  in  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  west  of  Flynn's  Knoll,  22.6 
feet — all  at  mean  low  water — the  great  results  attained  by  the  work  just 
reported  will  be  quite  apparent.  The  noticeable  result  is  that  there  is  now 
(1889)  a  navigable  channel  from  the  wharves  at  New  York  City  to  the 
sea,  affording  30  feet  depth,  approximately,  at  mean  low  water,  and  34.8 
feet  at  high  water,  and  that  it  is  practicable  for  the  largest  steamer  which 


i8 


visits  the  port  to  pass  in  or  out  over  the  bar  in  fair  weather  without  regard 
to  the  tides." 

Relating  to  the  durability  of  the  improvement,  Col.  Gillespie,  still 
later  on,  in  his  report  of  1890,  says: 

"  Surveys  of  all  the  channels  undergoing  improvement  were  made  in 
July,  1889,  and  again  during  January  and  February,  1890.  These  surveys 
show  that  the  improvement  is  in  a  very  satisfactory  condition.  Gedney's 
Channel  and  Bayside  Channel  (east  and  west)  are  practically  completed, 
having  a  depth  of  30  feet  at  mean  low  water,  for  the  full  projected  width 
of  1,000  feet.  The  Main  Ship  Channel  west  of  Flynn's  Knoll  has  a  depth 
of  30  feet,  mean  low  water,  for  a  width  of  500  to  800  feet,  and  a  depth 
of  28  feet  for  a  width  of  800  feet  throughout. 

"  The  severe  storm  of  September  9,  1890,  which  caused  a  suspension 
of  work  for  one  week,  does  not  appear  to  have  had  any  effect  on  the  im- 
proved channels.  There  is  no  evidence  of  shoaling,  and  the  soundings 
of  the  various  surveys  agree  so  well  with  one  another  that  it  seems  highly 
probable  that  the  improved  depths  will  be  well  maintained. 

"  When  the  project  is  completed  "  (as  it  now  is,  Oct.  10th,  1891)  "it 
will  be  practicable  for  the  steamship  companies  to  establish  a  regular 
hour  of  sailing  without  regard  to  tides." 

There  is  now  a  continuous  channel  1,000  feet  wide  and  30  feet  deep 
at  mean  low  water,  extending  from  the  Narrows  to  deep  water  of  the 
ocean ;  and  the  largest  steamships  can  enter  and  leave  the  port  at  any 
hour,  irrespective  of  the  condition  of  high  or  low  water. 

Government  Appropriations  for  the  Improvement. 

For  Gedney's  Channel,  by  act  or  July  5,  1884  $  200,000 

For  New  York  Harbor,  by  Act  of  August  5,  1886. . .  750,000 
For  New  York  Harbor,  by  Act  of  August  11,  1888..  380,000 
For  New  York  Harbor,  by  Act  of  September  19,  1890,  160,000 

Total  $1,490,000 

Estimated  Cost  by  Dredging. 

As  estimated  by  the  Government  Engineers,  Colonels  McFarland  and 
Gillespie,  the  whole  amount  of  dredging  required  to  complete  a  continu- 
ous channel  from  the  deep  water  of  the  ocean  to  the  Narrows,  not  less 
than  1,000  feet  wide,  and  not  less  than  30  feet  deep  at  mean  low  water, 
would  be  4,300,000  cubic  yards. 


9 


Respecting  the  cost  of  such  a  channel  by  dredging  alone,  Col. 
Gillespie,  in  his  report  for  1885,  estimated  50  cents  per  cubic  yard  for 
Gedney's  Channel  work,  and  40  cents  per  cubic  yard  for  that  of  the  main 
ship  channel.  But,  in  1886,  the  Engineers  estimated  the  cost  between  34 
and  35  cents  per  cubic  yard,  and  that,  at  this  price,  the  improvement 
would  cost  $1,490,000. 

Respecting  the  cost  01  such  a  channel,  by  dredging  alone,  Col. 
Gillespie,  in  his  report  for  1890,  says: 

"  The  estimated  cost  for  opening  the  channel  by  dredging,  revised  in 
1886,  was  fixed  at  $1,370,000.  which  was  again  increased  in  1887  to 
$1,490,000." 

After  the  improvement  began,  it  was.  found  essential  to  extend  the 
improvement  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel  north  of  Buoy  No.  12,  to  re- 
move the  Northwest  Shoal,  to  deepen  the  Bayside  Channel,  and  to  extend 
the  Gedney  Channel ;  none  of  which  were  included  in  the  original  pro- 
ject, and  which  accounts  for  the  increased  estimates  of  the  final  im- 
provement. 

What  the  Completed  Improvement  has  Actually  Cost. 

The  improvement  having  been  made  under  several  different  contracts, 
varying  in  number  of  yards,  and  in  price  per  yard,  the  entire  cost  is,  ot 
course,  made  up  by  the  aggregate  amount  paid  on  all  the  several  con- 
tracts, which  is  $1,285,862.94  for  the  removal  of  4,875,079  cubic  yards 
(instead  of  4.300.000.  as  first  estimated  it  would  be  necessary  to  remove), 
being  an  average  of  26.4  cents  per  cubic  yard. 


NUMBER    OF    CUBIC    YARDS    REMOVED  AVERAGE  COST  PER  YARD  AND 

TOTAL   COST  OF  THE  MAIN   SHIP   AND   GEDNEY'S  CHANNELS, 
RESPECTIVELY  : 


No.  of  Cubic  Yards 
Removed. 

Average  Price 
per  Cubic 
Yard. 

Total  Cost. 

Main  Ship  Channel  

Gedney's  Channel  

3,201,411 
1,673,688 

25.26  cents. 
28.5  " 

$   808,850  7t 
477.012  23 

Totals  

4.875,079 

26.4  cents. 

$1,285,862  94 

20 


Saving  to  the  Government  by  Means  of  Dredging. 

By  executing  the  entire  work  on  both  channels  exclusively  by  dredging, 
not  only  has  the  Government  saved  the  cost  of  the  contracting  works, 
but  has  greatly  shortened  the  period  required  for  the  completion  of  the 
improvement  to  the  great  advantage  of  commerce,  without  closure  of  any 
of  the  smaller  channels  across  the  shoals  at  the  entrance  to  the  Harbor. 

Difference  Between  the  Amount  of  Material  the  Contractors 
Were  Paid  for  Removing,  and  the  Amount  of 
Channel  Space  Obtained. 

Much  of  the  material  in  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  consisting  of  fine 
sand,  clay  and  sedimentary  mud.  was  so  nearly  of  the  same  specific 
gravity  as  water,  that  when  it  became  agitated  and  minutely  incorporated 
therewith,  by  the  action  of  the  pumps  and  currents  in  the  suction  pipes 
and  bins  of  the  ships  and  scows,  it  consequently  settled  so  slowly  in  the 
receiving  bins  that  a  portion  of  it  went  overboard  with  the  overflow ;  and, 
owing  to  its  light  weight,  was  carried  by  the  cross  currents  beyond  the 
walls  of  the  channel,  greatly  to  the  benefit  of  the  Government  and  cor- 
responding disadvantage  to  the  contractor. 

Referring  to  these  transverse  currents  and  their  good  effect  of  the  de- 
sired results  of  the  work  performed,  Col.  McFarland  in  his  report  for 
1888, says: 

"  The  work  done  during  the  winter  on  the  shoal  in  the  Main  Ship 
Channel  was  surveyed  April  16,  and  177.935  cubic  yards  measured  in 
place  were  found  to  have  been  removed  from  the  shoals.  The  quantity 
removed  by  the  dredges  amounted,  however,  to  only  128,453  cubic  yards 
measured  in  scows,  which  would  not  correspond  ordinarily  to  more  than 
102,762  cubic  yards  in  place.  It  is  apparent,  therefore,  that  the  work  of 
the  dredges  has  been  materially  supplemented  by  the  currents  of  the  Bay, 
which  at  this  point  runs  transverse  to  the  channel  instead  of  along  its  axis, 
and  the  tendency  is  therefore  to  carry  overflow  material  upon  the  adjacent 
shoals.  A  survey  made  in  June  to  ascertain  whether  this  material  found 
a  lodgment  in  the  channel  at  some  point  further  down  stream,  indicates, 
on  the  contrary,  that  the  channel  has  slightly  deepened  from  natural 
causes  alone,  both  in  the  prolongation  of  the  .dredged  area,  where  the 
work  has  been  done,  and  in  the  dredged  area  itself,  where  work 
has  been  suspended  for  six  weeks.  These  changes  are  highly  satis- 
iactory  as  far  as  they  go,  both  as  regards  the  permanency  in  the  dredged 


21 


channel  and  as  regards  the  great  saving  that  will  result  in  the  cost  of 
carrying  out  the  project,  if,  through  the  assistance  of  the  currents,  the  place 
measurement  continues  to  exceed  the  scow  measurement. 

"  Thus  it  is  seen  that  on  this  part  of  the  work,  up  to  the  time  of  this 
survey,  the  contractors  improved  the  channel  by  removing  one  and 
seventy-three  one  hundredths  cubic  yards  of  material  for  each  cubic  yard 
they  were  paid  for  handling." 

By  Whom  the  Work  was  Done. 

Though  there  were  several  others  who  undertook  portions  of  the  work, 
the  Joseph  Edwards  Dredging  Company,  of  the  City  of  New  York,  per- 
formed 88.2  per  cent,  of  the  entire  undertaking;  and  other  contractors, 
all  told,  1 1.8  percent.;  while  still  other  contractors,  though  spending 
large  sums  of  money  for  plant  and  making  frequent  attempts,  failed  to 
perform  any  part  of  the  work. 

Of  all  the  contractors  who  from  time  to  time  put  in  bids  for  work  on 
the  Improvement,  the  only  ones  to  whom  any  contracts  where  awarded 
were  Roy  Stone,  the  Brainard  Brothers,  Joseph  Cummings  (of  the  firm 
of  Morris  &  Cummings),  and  the  Joseph  Edwards  Dredging  Company. 

Of  these  four  contracting  parties  the  only  ones  who  succeeded  in 
doing  any  part  of  the  work  were  the  Brainard  Brothers,  and  the  Joseph 
Edwards  Dredging  Company. 

The  total  number  of  cubic  yards  excavated  from  the  channels,  taken 
to  sea  and  deposited  outside  of  the  Scotland  Light  Ship,  in  not  less  than 
14  fathoms  of  water,  was  4,875,079,  of  which  the  above  named  Company 
did  4,299,858  yards;  and  other  contractors,  a  total  of  575,221  yards;  as 
shown  by  the  following  tabulated  statements,  made  up  from  the  Reports 
of  the  Government  Engineers. 

It  will  also  be  seen  by  these  Tables  that  the  above  named  Company 
removed  this  large  amount  of  material  at  an  average  price  of  24.48  cents 
per  cubic  yard ;  and  that  the  general  average  price  paid  to  other  con- 
tractors was  40.53  cents  per  cubic  yard.  Being  at  the  rate  of  65.6 
per  cent,  more  than  was  paid  this  Company. 

While  the  price  paid  the  other  contractors  for  work  on  the  Gedney's 
Channel  was  at  the  rate  of  136  per  cent,  more  than  the  average  price  re- 
ceived by  this  Company. 


22 


Contracts  Taken  by  the  Joseph  Edwards  Dredging  Com- 
pany for  Work  on  the  Main  Ship  and 
Gedney's  Channels. 

DATE  OF   CONTRACTS  NO.   OF   YARDS   CONTRACTED    FOR  WHEN   TO  BE 

COMPLETED  EXTENSION  OF  TIME  DATE  OF  COMPLETION  NO. 

OF   CUBIC  YARDS   REMOVED  AND    PRICE  PER  YARD. 


Date  of 
contract. 


Number  of 
yards 
contracted  for. 


To  be 
completed. 


Extension 
of  time  to 


Date 
completed. 


Number  of 

yards 
removed. 


Price  cents 

per 
cubic  yard. 


gedney's  channel. 


April  27,  1887  

700,000 

Dec. 

,  '88. 

Dec.  31,  '88, 

Dec.  22,  '88. 

770,410 

28.5 

Dec.  15,  1888  

600,000 

Jan.  1 

,  '90. 

No 
extension. 

Nov.  30,'  89. 

599.362 

17 

Total   1,369,772  yards. 

Average   22.84  cents. 


MAIN  SHIP  CHANNEL. 


May  19,  1887  

1,500.000 

Dec.  1,  '88. 

June  30,  '89, 

and  to 
Dec.  31,  '89, 

Dec.  3,  '89. 

1,305,202 

28.5 

March  22,  1890  

9n 

Brainard's 
1,000,000  yard 
contract. 

June  18,  '90, 
withdrew. 

169,754 

16% 

March  18,  1890  

425,000 

Jan.  1,  '91. 

No 
extension. 

Aug.  13,  '90. 

425,000 

23.fi 

530,000 

June  1,  '91. 

No_ 
extension. 

Feb.  6,  '91. 

530,000 

22.6 

Feb.  16,  1890  

5<-o,ooo 

Oct.  1,  '91. 

Nov.  1,  'qi. 

Oct.  10,  '91. 

500,130 

23-9 

Total   2,930,086  yards. 

Average   25.25  cents. 


TOTAL  NUMBER  OF  YARDS  AND  GENERAL  AVERAGE  PRICE. 

Gedney's  Channel   1,369,772  cubic  yards 

Main  Ship  Channel   2.930,086     "  " 

Total  number  of  yards  removed   4,299,858  ' 

General  average  price  per  cubic  yard,  24.48  cents. 


23 


To  Whom  Contracts  Were  Given. 

DAT  EOF  CONTRACTS  LOCATION  OF  WORK.  NO.  OF   YARDS  CONTRACTED 

FOR  NO.   OF  YARDS  REMOVED   BY  DIFFERENT  CON- 
TRACTORS, AND  PRICES  PAID. 


Name  of 
contractor. 

Date  of 
contract. 

Location 
of  work. 

/ 

Number  of 
yards  con- 
tracted for. 

Number  of 
yards 
removed. 

Price  cents 

per 
cubic  yard. 

Amount. 

Feb.  7,  1885. 

Gedney's 
Channel. 

200  ft.  wide 
28  ft.  deep. 

None. 

Taken 
at  33- 

Eljjah  Brainard.  

July  31,  1S85. 

Gedney's 
Channel. 

3^o,>.oo 

303,896 

54 

$164,103.84 

Joseph  Edwards 
Dredging  Co  . . . 

April  27,  1887. 

Gedney's 
Channe'. 

700.000 

770,410 

285 

211,016,85 

Joseph  Edwards 
Dredging  Co  

May  19,  1887. 

Main  Ship 
Channel. 

1,500,000 

I,3°5>2°2 

28.5 

371,982.57 

Brainard  Brothers. 

May  11,  1888. 

Main  Ship 
Channel. 

2CO,COO 

200,000 

28.5 

57,000.00 

Joseph  Cummings.. 

May  11,  1888. 

Main  Ship 
Channel. 

800,000 

None. 

28.5 

Joseph  Edwards 
Dredging  Co  

Dec.  15,  1888. 

Gedney's 
Channel. 

600,000 

599»362 

17 

101,891.54 

Brainard  Dredging 
Co  

Nov.  26,  1889. 

Main  Ship 
Channel. 

1,000.000 
(a) 

71.325 

16% 

12,036.09 

Joseph  Edwards 
Dredging  Co  

Mar.  22,  1893. 

Main  Ship 
Channel 

(b)  Done  on 
Brainard's 
contract 

169,754 

16% 

28,645.98 

Joseph  Edwards 
Dredging  Co  

Mar.  18,  1890. 

Main  Ship 
Channel. 

425.000 

425,000 

23.5 

99.875.00 

Joseph  Edwards 
Dredging  Co  

Aug.  13,  1890. 

Main  Ship 
Channel. 

530,000 

530,000 

22.6 

119.780.00 

Joseph  Edwards 
Dredging  Co  

Feb.  16,  1891. 

Main  Ship 
Channel. 

500,000 

500,130 

23-9 

119,531.07 

Total  number  of  cubic  yards  removed   4,875,079 

Average  price  per  cubic  yard   26.4  cents. 

Total  cost  of  the  work   $1,285,862.94 


(a)  Brainard  Dredging  Co.  withdrew  from  this  contract  April  16,  1890. 

(b)  Joseph  Edwards  Dredging  Co.  withdrew  from  work  under  this  contract  J.ine  18,  1890,  and  the 
contract  was  annulled. 


24 


Time  Taken  to  Execute  the  Improvement. 

Work  was  commenced  on  the  first  contract  September  26,  1885,  and 
the  work  on  the  last  contract  was  completed  October  10,  1891,  covering 
a  period  of  six  years  and  fourteen  days;  but  the  Joseph  Edwards  Dredg- 
ing Company  did  not  commence  until  August,  1887. 

At  the  average  rate  of  progress  made  on  the  work  by  this  company, 
the  entire  improvement  could  have  been  made  by  them  in  a  period  of 
four  years  and  nine  months — and,  at  the  average  price  paid  this  company, 
the  entire  improvement  would  have  cost  $1,193,419.34. 

Nature  of  the  Material  and  Amount  Handled  Compared 
with  Amount  the  Contractors  were  Paid 
for  Removing. 

Referring  to  the  material  in  Gedney's  Channel,  Col.  Gillespie,  in  his 
report  for  1885,  says  : 

"  The  borings  just  made  by  a  diver  show  that  the  obstructing  shoal 
is  composed  of  gravel,  coarse  gray  sand  and  shells  for  a  depth  of  two  feet 
or  more,  well  compacted,  underneath  which  lies  coarse  sand,  the  larger 
shingle  of  the  size  of  a  pigeon  egg  being  on  the  crest  of  the  bar,  and  the 
underlying  sand  similar  to  that  of  the  adjacent  beach  and  shoals." 

Referring  to  the  relative  character  of  the  material  in  Gedney's  and  the 
Main  Ship  Channel,  the  Engineer  in  his  report  for  1888,  alluding  to  the 
Main  Ship  Channel,  says  : 

"  This  latter  material  is  much  more  difficult  to  dredge,  not  only  on 
account  of  the  large  percentage  of  mud  too  fine  to  be  caught  in  the  bins, 
but  also  on  account  of  its  lying  so  compactly  on  the  bottom,  and  being 
consequently  much  more  difficult  to  raise  with  the  pumps." 

The  material  removed  from  the  Main  Ship  Channel  consisted  of  fine 
sand  and  mixed  sedimentary  mud  and  clay ;  the  mud  and  clay 
formed  a  hard  crust  about  two  feet  deep  over-lying  the  fine  sand.  This 
mixture  of  mud  and  clay,  when  broken  up  and  thoroughly  mixed  with 
the  water  by  the  agitating  process  of  the  pumps,  and  being  so  fine  and  so 
nearly  the  specific  gravity  of  water,  it  settled  so  slowly  that,  in  a  portion 
of  this  channel,  it  required  the  excavation  of  a  much  greater  percentage 
of  material  than  was  retained  in  the  scows  and  bins,  as  much  of  it  would 
unavoidably  pass  overboard  with  the  overflow — and  a  large  proportion 
of  it  was  carried  by  cross  currents  beyond  the  walls  of  the  channels  to  the 
adjacent  shoals,  at  a  loss  to  the  contractor,  but  corresponding  gain  to  the 


25 


Government,  as  the  amount  of  material  for  which  the  contractor  was  paid 
was  estimated  only  by  scow  and  ship-tin  measurements.  See  Engi- 
neer's Report,  page  20. 

Magnitude  of  the  Undertaking. 

Besides  the  excavation  of  about  5.000,000  cubic  yards  of  material  and 
its  transportation,  at  an  average  round  trip  of  21  miles,  there  had  to  be 
dredged,  as  before  explained,  a  large  amount  more  which  went  overboard 
with  the  overflow,  especially  in  removing  the  crust  of  mud  and  clay  in 
the  Main  Ship  Channel. 

This  material  had  to  be  raised  from  24  to  35  feet  under  water  and 
elevated  to  a  height  on  shipboard,  which  from  the  bed  of  the  channels 
amounted  to  an  elevation  of  from  36  to  46  feet,  according  to  state  of  tide 
and  depth  of  channel. 

For  each  cubic  yard  of  solid  material  thus  handled  there  had  to  be 
raised  many  cubic  yards  of  water,  at  a  height,  from  the  surface  of  the  Bay 
to  the  mouth  of  the  discharge  pipes,  say  from  10  to  15  feet. 

Therefore  it  was  necessary  to  elevate  a  mixture  of  mud,  clay,  sand 
and  water  amounting  to  many  times  the  cubic  yards  of  material  which 
the  contractor  was  paid  for  handling. 

How  the  Work  was  Done,  or  System  of  Dredging 
Employed. 

The  system  of  dredging  employed  was  what  is  known  as  that  form  of 
hydraulic  dredging  in  which  the  means  for  excavating  and  elevating  the 
material  to  be  removed  are  centrifugal  pumps — those  employed  being  the 
'•'Edwards  Cataract  Pump''1  illustrations  of  which  are  shown  on  pages  41 
to  46. 

No  other  known  system  of  dredging  could  be  adapted  to  overcome 
l he  hereinafter  described  difficulties  incident  to  the  work  of  improving 
New  York  Harbor. 

But  besides  the  employment  of  centrifugal  pumps,  it  was  also  necessary 
to  devise  the  plant  in  such  a  manner  as  to  adapt  it  to  the  peculiarities  of 
the  work,  having  reference  to  the  exposed  position,  depth  of  water,  etc. 

Therefore,  in  view  of  the  magnitude  of  the  work  and  the  many  diffi- 
culties attending  it,  together  with  the  fact  that  heretofore  no  attainments 
in  the  art  of  dredging  were  adequate  to  the  undertaking,  the  Joseph 


26 


Edwards  Dredging  Company  devised  such  means  as  were  most  likely  to 
meet  the  emergencies  of  the  case,  and  immediately  commenced  the 
construction  of  the  necessary  plant ;  and  soon  became  contractors  on 
the  work ;  and  how  well  they  succeeded  is  best  indicated  by  what  they 
accomplished — as  shown  by  the  foregoing  Official  Reports  of  the  Engi- 
neers in  charge. 

Relating  to  Difficulties  Encountered. 

EXPOSED  POSITION    OF  THE    WORK    AND    DUMPING    GROUND    TO  WINDS 
AND  OCEAN;   EVEN   IN   FAIR  WEATHER. 

The  Lower  Bay,  in  which  the  Main  Ship  Channel  is  located,  embraces 
an  area  of  about  100  square  miles,  estimating  inside,  northward  and  west- 
ward, of  a  line  drawn  from  Sandy  Hook  to  Coney  Island,  with  an  open- 
ing outward  to  the  ocean,  between  Sandy  Hook  and  Coney  Island,  7 
miles  wide.  Through  this  opening  the  work  on  the  Alain  Ship  Channel 
was  exposed  to  the  full  sweep  of  the  ocean  from  the  northward  around 
by  the  east  to  the  southeast;  and  from  the  southwest  and  west  to  winds 
sweeping  down  Raritan  Bay,  while  winds  from  the  northwest  and  north 
had  a  scope  across  and  down  the  channel  from  Staten  Island  and  the 
Narrows.  Thus  exposed  to  the  wind  from  every  quarter,  except  the 
south,  it  was  often  impossible  to  handle  and  tow  the  scows  or  even  to 
work  the  dredging  steamers,  owing  to  roughness  of  the  Bay,  even  in  clear 
weather. 

The  Gedney's  Channel,  being  outside  of  the  entrance  to  the  Bay, 
may  be  considered  as  located  in  the  Atlantic  itself,  and  therefore  the 
work  on  this  channel  was  exposed  to  the  winds  and  roughness  of  the 
ocean  from  all  directions,  making  it  impossible  to  work  here  even  as  con- 
stantly as  on  the  Main  Ship  Channel ;  while  it  was  impossible  to  work  on 
either  channel  during  an  easterly  storm,  and  sometimes  for  days  after, 
owing  to  continuation  of  an  incoming  rolling  sea ;  and  often  when  the 
dredges  did  work  they  were  more  or  less  belabored  with  rough  seas. 

THE    LONG    DISTANCE  OF  TRANSPORTATION  OF  THE    MATERIAL  TO  THE 

DUMPING  GROUND. 

The  dumping  ground  being  outside  of  the  Scotland  Light  Ship,  the 
material  removed  from  the  Main  Ship  Channel  had  to  be  transported  an 
average  distance  of  12  to  14  miles,  making  the  round  trip  26  to  28  miles, 
and  that  from  the  Gedney's  Channel  6  to  7  miles,  making  the  round  trip 


27 


12  to  14  miles.  As  regards  the  transportation  by  towing,  there  was 
nearly  always  sufficient  sea  on  to  more  or  less  strain  the  scows,  and 
require  a  powerful  tug  to  handle  each  separate  scow. 

THE    GREAT    DEPTH   OF   WATER  IN   WHICH    THE   DREDGING    WAS  DONE. 

The  depth  of  water  from  which  this  large  amount  of  solid  material 
was  excavated  was  from  24  to  35  feet  (according  to  state  of  tide  and 
depth  of  channel),  and  had  to  be  elevated  on  ship-board  at  a  height  ot 
from  36  to  46  feet  from  the  bed  of  the  channels. 

THE  CONSTANT  PASSING  OF  SHIPS,   STEAMBOATS,  OCEAN   STEAMERS  AND 
OTHER  VESSELS,   UP  AND   DOWN  THE  CHANNELS. 

To  avoid  liability  of  collision  with  passing  vessels,  especially  with 
large  ocean  steamers,  it  was  frequently  necessary  to  shift  the  position  and 
stop  the  work  of  the  dredges  until  the  steamers  had  passed.  Besides  this, 
these  larger  steamers  produced  disturbing  wake  of  the  water,  and,  passing 
so  frequently,  interfered  not  a  little  with  the  work. 

Notwithstanding  the  utmost  caution,  two  collisions  occurred,  and  one 
of  the  company's  ships,  the  Advance,  was  run  down,  sunk  and  destroyed 
during  the  progress  of  the  improvement. 

DETENTIONS   BV   STORMS,    FOGS,   DRIFTING    ICE,  AND    EXTREME  WINTER 

WEATHER. 

On  account  of  rough  sea,  heavy  storms  and  otherwise  inclement 
weather,  as,  also,  on  account  of  thick  and  foggy  atmosphere,  even  though 
there  were  no  storm  or  roughness  of  sea,  and  sometimes  because  of  running 
ice,  it  was  often  necessary  to  suspend  operations  of  the  entire  plant,  from 
one  to  several  days,  with  no  diminution  of  expense,  save  a  trifle  on  fuel, 
which  greatly  delayed  progress  of  the  work  and  diminished  the  chances 
of  profit  to  the  company. 

OBSTRUCTIONS  ENCOUNTERED  IN  THE  MATERIAL  DREDGED. 

As  might  be  expected,  in  channels  so  long  and  extensively  navigated, 
there  were  frequently  found  minor  yet  troublesome  obstructions,  as  frag- 
ments of  wrecks,  anchors,  chains,  bars  of  iron,  cannon  balls,  etc.,  which, 
when  encountered,  sometimes  caused  damage  to  the  pumps,  suction  pipes 
and  drags.  Some  such  object,  encountered  and  passed  over,  would  again 
and  again  be  found  in  the  way,  necessitating  a  search  for  the  removal  of 


28 


it;  and  sometimes,  before  being  definitely  located  and  removed,  would 
not  only  break  a  drag  but  carry  away  both  drag  and  suction  pipe,  and 
delay  the  operation  of  the  entire  dredge  for  some  days,  resulting  in  a  loss 
to  the  contractor  of  several  thousand  dollars. 

TRANSVERSE   PRESSURE  ON  THE  DREDGES  BY  CROSS  CURRENTS  IN  THE 
MAIN   SHIP  CHANNEL. 

The  constant  transverse  currents  that  set  nearly  at  right  angles  across 
that  portion  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel  extending  north  and  south,  neces- 
sitated the  heading  of  the  dredging  ships  in  a  diagonal  direction  to  the 
line  of  the  channel,  which  caused  the  cross  currents  to  carry  one  of  the 
suction  pipes,  with  its  drag  or  mouth,  away  from  the  side,  and  the  other 
under  the  bottom  of  the  dredging  steamers,  which  greatly  and  constantly 
interfered  with  their  more  successful  operation,  and  frequently  causing 
injury  to  the  suction  pipes,  and  sometimes  badly  breaking  them. 

THE    FINENESS    AND    LIGHT   WEIGHT  OF    THE    MATERIAL  IN  THE  MAIN 

SHIP  CHANNEL. 

The  composition  of  a  part  of  the  material  in  the  Main  Ship  Channel 
was  of  such  a  nature  that,  when  it  became  thoroughly  agitated  and  in- 
corporated with  the  large  amount  of  water  handled,  and  being  so  nearly 
the  same  specific  gravity  of  water,  only  a  variable  percentage  of  the 
amount  dredged  would  settle  in  the  scows  and  bins  of  the  steamers, 
while  the  balance  of  it  would  go  overboard  with  the  overflow — the  re- 
spective proportions  that  would  settle  and  overflow  depending,  of  course, 
on  the  nature  of  the  material  being  dredged. 

FREQUENT  BREAKDOWNS   OF   SOME   PART  OF   THE  PLANT. 

The  extent  and  nature  of  the  plant,  and  the  character  and  location 
of  the  work  it  performed,  rendered  it  impossible  to  avoid  numerous  acci- 
dents and  breakdowns,  thus  necessitating  the  keeping  on  hand  of  a  large 
supply  of  duplicate  parts,  to  diminish  delay  of  repairs,  and  which  greatly 
increased  the  cost  of  the  general  outfit. 

EXTRAORDINARY  WEAR  AND  DEPRECIATION  OF  THE  PLANT. 

Owing  to  the  tension  to  which  the  mechanicism  of  the  plant  was  sub- 
mitted, and  the  speed  at  which  it  was  driven,  together  with  the  cutting 
effect  of  sand  rapidly  forced  through  the  suction  pipes  and  pumps,  and 


29 


scattered  by  wind  and  spray  throughout  the  machinery,  and  the  strain 
upon  the  ships  incident  to  being  constantly  loaded  and  unloaded,  the 
extensive  wear  and  depreciation  of  the  plant  constituted  a  serious  draw- 
back to  the  Contractor,  it  becoming  necessary  for  the  outfit  to  undergo 
general  yearly  repairs,  amounting  sometimes  to  a  cost  of  twenty  or  more 
thousand  dollars. 

Government  Engineers  in  Charge. 

The  Engineers,  under  whose  direction  the  Improvement  of  New  York 
Harbor  was  conducted,  were  Col.  Geo.  L.  Gillespie  and  Col.  Walter 
McFarland,  Corps  of  Engineers,  U.  S.  Army. 

Col.  Gillespie,  being  in  charge  at  the  commencement,  made  the  pre- 
liminary survey,  and  projected  and  recommended  the  plan  by  which  the 
improvement  has  been  expeditiously  and  successfully  accomplished,  and 
at  a  cost  to  the  Government  not  exceeding  25  per  cent,  of  the  amount 
originally  estimated  to  be  necessary  to  attain  the  desired  results  by  the 
only  other  project  presented. 

During  an  absence  of  Col.  Gillespie,  the  Improvement  was  in  charge 
of  Col.  McFarland.  After  the  demise  of  Col.  McFarland,  Col.  Gillespie 
again  took  charge,  and  under  him,  and  in  accordance  with  his  plan  and 
recommendation,  was  completed,  as  well  as  commenced,  the  Improve- 
ment of  New  York  Harbor. 

Harmonious  Relations  Between  Engineers  in  Charge  and 

Contractors. 

As  was  to  be  expected,  in  an  undertaking  of  such  a  nature  and  mag- 
nitude as  the  Improvement  of  New  York  Harbor,  various  difficulties  had 
to  be  encountered  and  overcome  by  the  Engineers  in  charge  as  well  as 
the  Contractors  ;  in  view  of  which  it  is  worthy  to  mention  that,  from  the 
commencement  to  completion  of  the  work,  the  most  harmonious  relations 
existed  between  them;  the  representatives  of  the  Government  being 
always  considerate  of  the  Contractors,  they,  in  turn,  co-operated  with 
ambition  to  bring  the  undertaking  to  a  successful  consummation. 


3° 


The  Pumps  the  Vital  Parts  of  the  Plant. 

As  the  pumps  are  the  chief  features  of  the  plant,  it  can  be  readily  un- 
derstood that,  substantially,  as  work  the  pumps  so  works  the  plant. 

Though  a  self-propelling  and  self-containing  dredging  steamer  needs 
to  be  in  all  its  appointments  rightly  constructed  and  properly  managed, 
yet  it  is  apparent  that  however  well  may  be  contrived  everything  else, 
and  however  skillfully  managed,  the  results  attained  will  be  put  partial 
without  an  effective  pump. 

Besides,  as  the  pumps  are  the  parts  of  the  plant  submitted  to  the 
greatest  wear  by  the  action  of  sand,  and  are  liable  to  the  greatest  number 
of  breakages  from  various  resistant  objects  passing  through  them,  they 
need  to  be  provided  with  the  best  possible  means  of  endurance  and  ready 
repair. 

That  the  pumps  employed  on  this  work  meet  all  these  requirements 
is  sufficiently  demonstrated  by  what  has  been  done  with  them,  not  only 
on  the  Improvement  of  New  York  Harbor,  but  by  what  they  have  ac- 
complished on  difficult  work  elsewhere. 

So  well  contrived  to  resist  breakage,  and  so  powerful  is  this  pump,  that 
it  has  drawn  up  from  a  depth  of  35  feet  under  water,  and  elevated  from 
the  bed  of  the  channel  to  the  mouth  of  the  discharge-pipe,  a  height  of  46 
feet,  bars  of  pig  iron  heavy  as  a  man  can  lift,  cannons  balls,  &c.,  and 
without  damage  to  itself  that  could  not  be  repaired  in  20  minutes,  and  at 
a  trifling  cost ;  which,  without  special  provisions  for  encountering  such 
obstacles,  would  often  totally  wreck  the  pump. 

Special  Evidence  of  the  Capacity  of  the  Edwards 
Cataract  Pump. 

The  following  Statement  and  Table,  illustrative  of  the  detailed 
record  kept  of  the  work  done,  is  taken  from  the  Government  Reports, 
giving  an  account  of  the  work  by  one  of  the  ships,  (the  Reliance) 
during  a  period  of  28^  days,  from  Aug.  27th,  to  October  10,  189 1. 


31 


Statement  of  Averages. 

Reduced  from  the  following  Table  0/  28*4  days  work,  from  Aug.  27/// 
t(TjOct.  10.  1 89 1,  on  Gednefs  Channel  by  the  Dredging  Steamer  Reliance. 

Average  time  pumping  per  load  48  Tr,0  minutes. 

"       cubic  yards  per  load  584.87  cubic  yards. 

"       time  pumping  per  day  4  hours  58  T4(T  minutes. 

"         "    on  bar  per  day  5  hours,  43  t4q  minutes. 

"   bar  to  dump  34  minutes. 

"         "    dumping  12  tV  minutes. 

"         "    dump  to  bar  25  T7()minutes. 

"         "    dump  to  anchor  66  T6)T  minutes. 

"         "    anchor  to  bar  51  minutes. 

"    under  steam  per  day  1 6  hours, 4  y2^  minutes. 

"       No.  of  loads  per  day  worked. .  .6.73. 

cubic  yards  per  day  worked. . .  .3,936.65  cubic  yards. 

"      rate  per  minute  12.03  CUDic  yards. 

Time  lost  by  repairs  2  hours.  24  minutes. 

"      "    "  weather  32  "      50  " 

Total  time  lost   35  "       14  u 

On  the  1  oth  of  September  : — 

The  6th  load  (of  611  cubic  yards)  was  done  at  the  rate  of  15.27  cubic 
yards  per  minute ; 

The  7th  load  (of  608  cubic  yards)  was  done  at  the  rate  of  16.43  cubic 
yards  per  minute ; 

Or  an  average  of  946  cubic  yards  per  hour. 


32 


Remarks. 

C  «J 

5  - 

s  o 
2  c 

Week   ending  August 
29th,    2>lA    days  on 
Main  Ship  Channel. 

Foggy  in  the  morning. 

Too  rough  to  work. 

Valve-stem  of  large 
washout  pump 
broke. 

Belt  on  port  pump 
broke. 

•SpBOJJO  -O^ 

00 

m 

*B3S  JO  U0Tltpu03 

£  -  - 

in  z.  O 

Smooth 
Swell. 

Swell. 

X 

o 
o 
S 
m 

Smooth 

JZ 

be 
o 

>,  --i. 

Chop. 

Smooth 
Smooth 

•pui.WJO  30JOJ  piIU  UOTJ03JIQ      I  W  C/5  ^    •  ^  ^  K  „•  .Jf^  .SP   ".SP^  u -0  8    -.^    •  • 


Time  Lost. 

■sum  jejoj^ 

S 

ooiooot^-^moi^i-*-  o 
mNOlo"-iio~'>i--<t-i/-)"'j-  o 

1       1        1       1       1       1       1       1       1       1      1  1 

•jaqjesM  A"g 

w 

•         <  10 

:    :  1 

•sjtedaj  £g 

00  \o 

LO  CM 

A  I 

•jeq  oj  joqouy 

00        CMOO                   m       M                 VO      CM  CM 
-^•roOOO->s--«l-morri  m 
1        1        1        1        1        i        1        1        I      1  1 
0O»*mhOOOhO  0 

•S3SIVBD 

jsqjo  pue  jno  juq 

m       00  vC 

I  T 

O      0  c 

■^-vo-oovomvoi-  — 

OCT-^NiMlMClCM  m 

1   1   1   1   1   1   1  1  1 

O00OOOO0O  0 

uoqouB  oj  diutiQ 

§ 

m      cm       f-^      in      in  C* 

0  w       H       CM       lO  u 

1  i  I  i  i  J 

CM                 VO       vO      O  00 

a  a  i  a  I  i 

•jBq  oj  diun(  \ 

a 

CMcocMrou-i>-i-*-rocM—  oo  oo 

1     1     1     1     1     !     1     1     I     I  1 

►-CMCMOCMCMCMCMOCMCM  cm 

•SuidmnQ 

s 

lOriNror^i-icMCSroCMro  cm 
1         1        1        I        1        1         1        1        1         1      1  1 

•diunp  01  a^a 

a 

LO                     -<J-V£)          +         0>       (O          MOO                   "1  t"» 
W        11       *t       «        lO*J-»^-IH        rO       lO    1/1  u-) 

1   1   1   1   1   1   1   I   1   1  1  1 

•Suiiunj, 

s 

o— 18 
o— 33 

o  1  I 

0  —  26 
0 — 32 
0—31 
0 — 30 
0  -14 
c— 18 

O  21 

O  —  26 

UBq  UO  3UIIJ  psjoj. 

OS       -<1-        CM         ^        xf        M      VO                     0        OO  CM 

1    i    1    1    1    1    T    M    1  !  T 

f,      XO       NO        CM       *£>        N        N       N       CI               VO             I  - 

•sjnuuu  jad  3j«>i        —  b 
1  u 

tJ-CM        m       CM        TO        O        O        "tf-       xj-   OO  00 

■*^N00ro-*    ^p-<*-iOKC  cm 
».CM^wrocM».Mro--M  C 

•Suidiund  sun  y 

OOOOrnO       CM       Ot-^M       ►-■>!->/->  vo 

1  1  T  T  T  T  I  I  T  f  T  1 

ro      in      m      cm      m      m     \G     vo      m     vo    m  m 

psiBA 
-■coxa  spauX  oiqiif) 

0                  vC       vC         m       ■<*-      vC         -       OOvC^C  CC 
^-w^vomcommmOO  H 
N-***-!-!                                       11  m 

aivQ 

t^oo      0\>-      m      cm      m     ■<>-     m          00  on 

CM        CM        CM  ro 

<  m 

33 


a  s  in  3  . 

CJ  U  (i  «  u  u 

-  S  a  o  *  «a 

VO  CM." 

*  S3  o  rt  o  % 

*5  a  a 


"e  gee. 
w  0 


>  i-  >,  rt 

.  ?  o  rt  u 


5    T3     TJ  >: 


rt  u  jj  y 

PS  yi  to  yj 


Tf       u->     o      ion      m  m 

I        -       I       I       I       I       I  I 


in      ->j-      ir>         in  h         m  O 

I         I         I  I  I  I       I  I 


i  i  •  I 

O         O       M  0 


f  f 


i  ii 


I    I    I  I 


I  I  I 


I  I 


I    I   I  I 


!    I  I 


I   I   I  I 


r  r  t  T 


i  i 


i  i 


i  i  i 


■*  O  O 

I  llli 


!     I  I 


I     I  I 


I    I  I 

cm     co  cm 


co  co 
I  I 

o  o 


1     o     £     o  d 


I        i       i  ii 


I        I      I      I      I  I 


I      I  I 


CO     u">  CM 

J,  U 


*8  « 


o      Ji     >1     Ji  *  i- 


I       I  I 


34 


Advantages  of  Pump  Dredging  Over  Other  Systems. 

It  can  be  employed  where  no  other  system  of  dredging  is  possible,  as 
shown  by  its  application  to  the  Improvement  of  New  York  Harbor,  on 
which  the  steamer  dredges  have  successfully  worked  in  heavy  sea-way. 

It  leaves  a  smoother  and  more  uniform  bottom  than  any  other  sys- 
tem. 

It  can  do  the  work  at  much  less  cost  than  any  other  system  of  dredg- 
ing, wherever  it  is  applicable. 

It  can  go  over  the  ground  much  more  rapidly  where  only  a  slight  cut 
of  material  is  required  to  be  taken. 

It  is  the  only  system  of  dredging  that  can  be  employed  to  keep  chan- 
nels open  that  have  a  tendency  to  fill  up,  as  a  dredging  steamer  can  pass 
over  large  areas  and  take  only  the  needed  skimming  of  material. 


Outline  Description  of  the  Plant. 

The  plant  provided  for  executing  the  work  of  the  Improvement  of 
New  York  Harbor  by  this  company  consists  of  3  sea-going  Dredging 
Steamers,  4  large  Scows,  4  Steam  Tugs  for  towing  scows,  1  Steam  Supply 
Boat,  1  Steam  Tender,  Docks,  Repair  Shops,  Storehouses,  Water  Works, 
Coal  Bins,  Etc. 

The  Dredging  Steamers,  known  as  the  Reliance,  Advance  and  Mount 
Waldo,  are  not  essentially  unlike  other  sea-going  steamers,  aside  from 
their  dredging  outfits.  Their  dimensions  and  daily  working  capacity  are 
as  follows  : 

THE  RELIANCE. 

Length   157  feet. 

Beam   37  * 

Depth  of  Hold    16  " 

Twin  Propellers  and  Compound  Engines. 

Average  carrying  Capacity  650  cubic  yards. 

Daily  working  capacity  of  this  Dredge  on  Gedney's  Channel,  where 
the  material  consisted  of  coarse  sand,  and  freighting  distance  about  6 
miles  each  way,  was  7  loads;  and  on  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  where  the 
material  consisted  of  mud,  clay  and  fine  sand,  and  freighting  distance 
about  12  miles  each  way,  was  3  loads. 


36 


THE  ADVANCE. 

Length  132  feet. 

Beam     34  " 

Depth  of  Hold    8  " 

Single  Propeller  and  Compound  Engine. 

Average  carrying  Capacity  500  cubic  yards. 

Daily  working  capacity  of  this  Dredge,  on  the  same  channels,  respec- 
tively, was  also  7  loads  and  3  loads. 

THE   MOUNT  WALDO. 

Length   .  145  feet 

Beam   31  " 

Depth  of  hold   11  " 

Single  Propeller  and  Compound  Engine  

Average  carrying  capacity   275  cubic  yards. 

Daily  working  capacity  of  this  Dredge,  discharging  into  scows,  work- 
ing on  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  on  material  consisting  of  mud.  clay  and 
fine  sand,  was  8  scow  loads  of  500  yards  each. 

The  Mount  Waldo,  except  in  the  winter  time,  instead  of  being  em- 
ployed as  the  other  two  steamers  were,  namely,  for  dredging  and  trans- 
portation, was  kept  constantly  employed  at  dredging,  by  discharging  the 
material  into  scows  and  not  into  her  own  bins,  and  the  scows  towed  to 
the  dumping  ground  by  steam  tugs — the  capacity  of  the  scows  being  500 
cubic  yards  each. 

Besides  the  3  above  described  Steamer  Dredges  and  4  Scows,  there 
were  4  powerful  sea-going  Tugs  for  towing  the  scows  to  sea  ;  also  a  large 
steam  Lighter  employed  as  a  supply  boat,  for  furnishing  the  dredging 
steamers  with  coal,  water,  duplicate  parts,  provisions,  <\:c.,  and  also  a 
steam  Tug  employed  as  a  general  Tender  for  convenience  of  the  General 
Manager  and  Superintendent. 

This  Dredging  Fleet  was  under  the  General  Management  of  the 
President  of  the  Company,  Mr.  Joseph  Edwards. 

A  Brief  Description  of  the  Pumping  Outfits.— Each  steam 
dredge  was  provided  with  two  pumping  outfits  and  independently  ar- 
ranged, so  that  either  could  be  operated  regardless  of  the  other;  each 
outfit  having  a  centrifugal  pump,  engine,  suction  and  discharge  pipes. 
I  he  suction  pipes,  corresponding  to  the  size  of  the  pumps,  one  on  either 


38 


side  of  the  steamer,  locate  !  about  midway  from  bow  to  stern,  extend 
laterally  from  the  pumps  to  the  outside  of  the  ship,  then,  turning  with  an 
easy  bend  at  right  angles,  extend  |  when  not  in  use)  along  the  sides  of  the 
dredge,  being  held  up,  lowered  and  raised  by  suitable  blocks  and  ropes 
which  are  worked  by  special  hoisting  engines.  These  suction  pipes,  15 
and  18  inches  in  diameter,  are  about  60  feet  long,  terminating  about 
opposite  the  stern  of  the  ship,  with  suitable  mouth  pieces,  termed  drags, 
to  fit  on  the  bed  of  the  channel  and  facilitate  the  ingress  of  the  material. 
See  illustrations,  pages  48  to  53,  and  lithographic  plates. 

To  render  the  suction  pipes  flexible,  so  they  will  accommodate  them- 
selves to  the  pitching  and  rolling  motions  of  the  steamer,  a  section  of 
them  about  12  feet  in  length,  located  a  few  feet  from  the  elbow,  consists 
of  rubber :  these  flexible  sections  being  supported  by  special  arrange- 
ment of  triple  chains  and  blocks  against  the  vertical  strain  caused  by  the 
weight  of  the  suction  pipes  themselves  and  what  passes  through  them  ; 
and  by  tension  chains  against  the  longitudinal  strain  of  the  drags  resting 
on  the  bottom. 

The  steamers  and  scows  were  provided  with  special  arrangements  to 
afford  a  long  flow  of  the  mixture  of  mud,  clay,  sand  and  water,  between 
the  discharge  from  the  pumps  and  the  over-flow  outlets,  to  facilitate  the 
settlement  of  the  solid  material  in  their  bins.    See  plate  V. 

The  scows  were  divided  into  compartments  surmounted  with  long- 
itudinal sluice-ways  extending  either  way  from  a  central  receiving  hopper. 
These  sluices  were  provided  along  their  course  with  a  series  of  adjustable 
bottom  and  side-gates  by  means  of  which  the  material  could  be  deposited 
faster  or  slower  in  the  different  compartments ;  whereby  the  load  could 
be  uniformly  distributed  throughout  the  lengih  and  breadth  of  the  scows, 
to  prevent  them  from  listing,  and  enable  them  to  be  freighted  to  their 
full  capacity.    See  plate  V. 

Method  of  Working  the  Dredging  Steamers. —  The  steam- 
ers were  kept  under  headway  from  the  time  they  left  their  anchorage  in 
the  morning  until  they  returned  to  it  at  night.  When  a  dredge  reached 
the  channel  the  suction-pipes  were  lowered  to  an  angle  of  from  30  to  40 
degrees,  to  bring  the  drags  in  contact  with  the  bottom.  To  keep  the 
vessel  on  her  line  of  work  and  supply  the  drags  with  material,  she  was 
kept  constantlv  under  steering  headway.    As  soon  as  the  sand  bins  were 


4Q 


filled,  the  suction-pipes  were  hoisted  out  of  water,  and  the  steamer  put 
under  full  headway  for  the  dumping  ground.  While  she  was  turning  to 
return  to  the  work  again,  the  dump-gates  were  opened  and  her  cargo  dis- 
charged— the  discharge  being  facilitated  by  pumping  water  into  the  bins 
with  the  dredging  pumps.  On  again  reaching  the  work,  her  speed  was 
slackened,  drags  lowered  and  pumps  started,  and  so  on,  until  the  time 
to  return  to  her  anchorage  for  the  night. 

The  above  brief  general  description  affords  but  a  limited  view  of  the 
construction  and  performance  of  the  plant.  To  fully  appreciate  the  ar- 
rangement and  effective  execution  of  the  steamer  dredges,  they  needed 
to  be  seen  in  operation,  especially  in  a  heavy  seaway. 

Some  idea  may  be  had  of  the  extent  of  the  plant  from  the  fact  that, 
in  connection  therewith  in  one  way  and  another,  it  included  no  less 
than  80  different  steam  cylinders. 

Special  Features  of  the  Pump  Employed  on  the  Im- 
provement of  New  York  Harbor. — As  it  may  be  interesting  to 
some  to  obtain  a  somewhat  general  knowledge  of  the  pump  employed 
in  executing  the  improvement  of  New  York  Harbor,  illustrations  of  it 
are  inserted  herein,  and  which  so  well  represents  its  general  construction, 
that  it  is  not  otherwise  necessary  to  more  than  point  out  a  few  of  its 
special  features.    These  relate  : 

First.  To  the  means  of  providing  free  ingress  of  the  material  to  be 
pumped. 

Second.  To  the  means  of  changing  the  position  of  the  outlet  to  any 
desired  angle  with  the  horizontal  plane,  independent  of  the  suction. 

Third.  To  the  means  of  holding  and  adjusting  the  rotating  parts  of 
the  pump  against  displacement  by  its  suction  force. 

Fourth.  To  the  means  of  preventing  destruction  of  its  more  expen- 
sive parts  by  violent  action  of  resistant  objects  liable  to  be  drawn  into  it; 
and 

Fifth.  To  the  means  of  preventing,  and  readily  and  economically 
repairing  damage  liable  to  occur  to  it  by  violence  as  well  as  by  ordinary 
wear. 

(1.)  By  referring  to  illustration,  page  41,  which  is  a  central  vertical 
section,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  wings  (MM),  opposite  and  equal  to  the 


42 


diameter  of  the  inlet  (C),  are  cut  away,  in  the  form  of  an  ogee,  whereby 
the  current  of  the  indrawn  material  is  uninterrupted  by  rotation  of  the 
wings,  until  it  reaches  the  central  part  of  the  pump. 

(2.)  The  shell  or  casting  (B  B)  is  independent  of  the  base,  being 
held  by  the  two  heads  (CC  and  D  D),  and  the  heads  being  screwred  to 
the  base  or  bed-plate  (A  A),  therefore  to  vertically  rotate  the  shell  and 
so  place  the  outlet  in  position  to  throw  the  discharge  at  any  desired 
angle  with  the  horizontal  plane,  and  that,  too,  without  detaching  the  suc- 
tion, it  is  only  necessary  to  remove  the  lug-bolts  (c'  c'  c')  which  secure 
the  shell  to  the  heads. 

(3.)  To  hold  the  rotating  parts  of  the  pump  from  being  longitudi- 
nally displaced,  and  the  wings  from  coming  in  contact  with  the  suction 
head,  by  the  suction  force  of  the  pump,  the  counter  resistance  is  not  ob- 
tained by  dependence  on  the  bearings  of  the  shaft,  as  in  other  centrifugal 
pumps,  but  by  utilizing,  for  an  unyielding  counter  resistance,  the  head  of 
the  pump  itself,  explained  as  follows : 

A  circular  yoke  (O  O)  is  fastened  by  collar  bolts  (o  o)  to  the  flange 
(D'  D')  of  a  central  projection  (provided  for  this  purpose)  on  the  front 
head  of  the  pump.  Surrounding  the  pump-shaft  (see  Fig.  6),  where  it 
passes  through  the  circular  yoke,  is  provided  an  externally  threaded 
sleeve  (T  T),  which,  by  a  corresponding  thread  therein,  is  screwed  into 
the  said  yoke.  Upon  the  pump-end  of  this  sleeve  is  a  jam-nut  (m'm'). 
Upon  the  outer  end,  and  as  a  part  of  it,  is  a  heavy  flange  (m) ;  and  next 
to  the  outer  face  of  this  sleeve  is  placed  two  or  three  loose  smooth-faced 
washers  (ii).  Outside  of  and  adjacent  to  these  is  the  shaft  coupling 
(P  P),  which  unites  the  pump-shaft  to  the  driving-shaft — the  pump-end 
of  the  coupling  being  faced  to  work  against  the  washers.  The  sleeve 
(T  T)  does  not  come  in  contact  with  the  shaft,  there  being  a  space  be- 
tween them. 

By  this  arrangement  the  longitudinal  strain  on  the  pump-shaft,  caused 
by  the  suction  pull  on  the  rotating  parts  of  the  pump,  will  (through  the 
medium  of  the  shaft)  first  fall  on  the  pump-end  of  the  shaft  coupling 
(P  P),  (which,  of  course,  is  immovably  fastened  to  the  shaft),  then  on  the 
loose  washers  (i  i),  then  on  the  flange  (mm)  of  the  adjustable  sleeve 
(T  T),  then  on  the  circular  yoke  (O  O),  then  on  the  collar-bolts  (o  o), 
and  then  on  the  front  head  of  the  pump.    This  arrangement  of  the 


CENTRAL    VFRTICAL    SECTION    OF  PUMP. 


VIEW    OF    SUCTION    END    OF  PUMPS. 


INTERIOR    VIEW    OF  THE    PUMP,    SHOWING    DETACHABLE    PLATES    IN  PLACE. 


47 


threaded  sleeve  (T  T)  also  provides  for  longitudinally  adjusting  the 
rotating  parts  of  the  pump  within  its  shell  whenever  required. 

(4)  ,  To  prevent  more  serious  damage  by  breakage  of  more  expensive 
parts  of  the  pump,  the  permanent  wings  (M  M),  instead  of  extending 
from  the  hub  (k'  k')  to  the  shell  (B  B),  extend  about  two-thirds  of  this  dis- 
tance. To  these  permanent  wings  are  bolted  what  may  be  termed 
extension  or  false  wings  (N),  made  light  and  of  wrought  and  easily  bent 
metal,  yet  sufficiently  strong  for  the  work  being  done.  These  are  fastened 
to  the  permanent  wings,  each  with  two  bolts,  one  at  each  end.  having 
their  bolt-holes  slotted  out  to  the  ends  thereof,  as  shown  by  figure  5. 
page  43- 

By  this  arrangement,  unusual  resistant  objects,  as  lumps  of  iron,  etc., 
being  thrown,  by  centrifugal  force  to  the  outer  ends  of  the  wings,  exert 
their  violence  against  these  false  detachable  wings,  bend  and  carry  them 
away,  by  drawing  them  from  their  bolt-fastenings,  and  thereby  preventing 
greater  damage  to  more  costly  parts  of  the  pump — these  false  wings  be- 
ing inexpensive  and  quickly  replaced. 

(5)  .  To  protect  the  heads  of  the  pump  from  rapid  cutting  action  ot 
the  sand,  they  are  provided  with  less  expensive  internal  facings. 

To  facilitate  the  examination  of  the  condition  of  the  interior  of  the 
pump,  replace  the  detachable  wings,  and  readily  make  other  repairs,  the 
shell  is  provided  with  a  man-hole,  (F  F,  page  44). 

Special  Features  of  the  Drags  and  Suction  Pipes  and  their 
Connection  with  the  Pumps  and  Ships. 

The  illustration,  page  48,  represents  a  side  view  of  a  portion  of  the 
dredging  steamer  Reliance,  showing  the  suction  pipe  and  drag  in  position 
while  dredging,  also  (in  dotted  lines)  the  same  hoisted  out  of  the  water 
alongside  of  the  dredge,  in  the  position  it  occupies  when  the  steamer  is 
not  at  work,  and  when  going  to  and  returning  from  the  dumping  ground. 
B.  shows  the  relative  position  of  the  flexible  rubber  section  of  the  suction 
pipe,  as  supported  by  hoisting  and  strain  purchases  in  general. 

An  enlarged  view  of  the  flexible  rubber  section  of  the  suction  pipe  is 
shown  by  the  several  illustrations  on  page  48,  and  which  so  clearly  show 
its  construction  and  connection  with  the  other  portions  of  the  suction 
pipe  that  no  further  explanation  of  its  details  need  to  be  here  given  ; 
except  to  call  attention  to  the  manner  by  which  it  is  supported  and  pro  - 
tected  from  short  bends  by  the  peculiar  arrangement  of  the  suspending 


VIEW  OF  TR4NSVERSE  SECTION   OF  SUCTION   PIPE  AND  ITS  CONNECTION   WITH  THE 
PUMP  AND  WiTH  THE   RAIL  OF  THE  SHIP. 


VIEWS    OF    THE    FLEXIBLE    RUBBER    SECTION    OF    THE  SUCTION 


5i 


chains  4  and  5,  and  travelling  block  2,  and  the  additional  provision 
against  longitudinal  tension  by  the  holding  chain  7,  one  end  of  which 
connects  with  the  drag  and  the  other  end  with  the  side  of  the  ship — see 
page  46. 

An  enlarged  view  is  shown  on  page  49  of  the  right  angle  bend, 
swivel  rail  pipe  and  stuffing  box  (in  plan  and  section,  with  enlarged  sec- 
tion of  the  stuffing  box)  forming  the  transverse  portion  of  the  suction 
pipe,  and  its  connection  with  the  pump  and  ship. 

Fig.  10  is  a  plan  view  of  the  swivel  rail  pipe  and  stuffing-box — the 
rail  pipe  being  in  its  rail-box  or  bearing  O  O,  and  having  two  caps,  O'O', 
as  shown  in  Fig.  12.  The  peculiarity  of  this  box,  O  O,  is  that  it  pro- 
vides two  separate  bearings,  P  and  P,  located  some  distance  apart  and 
in  recesses  pp  and  pp  formed  on  the  suction-pipe  by  raised  shoulders. 
The  object  of  these  two  narrow  bearings  instead  of  one  broad  bearing  is 
to  avoid  cramping  of  the  pipe  in  the  said  box  when  laterally  strained  by 
the  rolling  of  the  ship,  thus  allowing  the  pipe  to  swivel  easily  while  the 
drag  is  being  drawn  along  the  bottom  in  connection  with  the  material 
to  be  raised,  when,  at  the  same  time,  the  ship  may  be  raising  and  lower- 
ing by  the  roughness  of  the  sea.  It  also  gives  stiff  support  to  the  suction 
pipe  on  the  side  of  the  ship  ;  also  furnishes  two  sets  of  shoulders  on  the 
pipe  as  an  extra  longitudinal  support  or  hold  on  the  said  pipe.  Another 
peculiarity  of  this  box  is  that  the  cap  is  made  in  two  separate  parts  to 
make  it  possible  to  repair  or  renew  the  said  caps  without  stopping  work, 
by  removing  but  one  of  the  same  at  a  time. 

Figs.  11  and  13  illustrate  the  method  of  attaching  the  suction-pipe  B 
by  stuffing  box  R  to  the  pump.  R  is  a  section  of  this  connection.  At  one 
end  it  has  a  flange  and  opening  that  correspond  with  the  same  on  the 
pump  T,  and  which  at  the  other  end  is  enlarged  and  within  has  two 
shoulders  r'  and  r",  and  surrounds  the  inner  end  of  the  connecting 
suction-pipe — the  extreme  end  of  which  enters  the  smaller  diameter  of 
the  section  R,  formed  by  the  shoulder  r'.  Between  the  larger  diameter 
of  the  said  section  R  and  the  said  pipe  B  is  provided  the  gland  S  between 
which  and  the  shoulder  r",  is  the  packing  space  which  is  filled  with  soft 
packing  material  r  r,  and  which  is  compacted  around  the  said  suction- 
pipe  between  the  end  of  the  said  gland  and  the  shoulder  r"  by  means  of 
the  bolts  and  nuts  r  3  (best  seen  in  Fig.  13).  By  this  means  is  provided 
a  long  rotating  union  between  the  suction-pipe  and  the  pump,  making  a 
stiff  and  firm  connection  for  the  said  suction-pipe  against  the  straining 
action  produced  by  the  rolling  of  the  ship  in  deep  and  rough  water. 

To  further  support  the  elbow  of  the  suction-pipe  and  so  relieve  the 
lateral  strain  thereof  on  its  rail  pipe  bearing  in  the  side  of  the  ship  and  its 
attachment  to  the  pump  and,  thereby,  to  allow  the  same  to  more  easily 
rotate  is  provided  a  lug,  I,  Figs.  10  and  11,  on  the  rotating  center  of  the 


53 


said  elbow  and  vertically  over  it  a  goose-neck  I',  secured  to  the  said 
bearings,  one  of  which  is  shown  transversely  by  Fig.  n.  Between  the 
said  lug  and  the  outer  end  of  the  said  goose-neck  is  provided  a  turnbuckle 
i  to  vertically  adjust  the  support  of  the  former  by  the  latter,  and  to  hold 
the  said  elbow  from  horizontal  back  strain  is  provided  a  holding  chain 
i  4  Fig.  10,  in  front  of  the  elbow.  To  assist  in  supporting  said  goose-neck 
is  provided  a  turnbuckle  i  2,  Fig.  n,  to  connect  with  a  chain  which 
attaches  to  the  ship. 

It  is  evident  that  the  suction  pipes,  one  on  each  side  of  the  ship, 
which  are  about  60  feet  long,  descending  from  the  ship  at  an  angle  ot 
some  forty-five  degrees  with  the  horizon,  and  large  and  heavy,  besides 
being  filled  (when  at  work)  with  sand  and  water  are  necessarily  subjected 
to  being  strained  or  broken  in  any  of  its  parts  by  the  rolling  and  pitching 
of  the  vessel,  which  often  occurs  in  what  is  termed  "  outside  work  "  or  in 
unprotected  localities.  The  object  of  these  improvements  is  to  so  attach 
the  suction  pipes  and  provide  such  means  of  hoisting  and  lowering  the 
same  and  adjusting  them  to  their  work,  and  to  have  such  complete  control 
over  them  as  to  not  only  keep  them  steadily  at  work,  but,  as  far  as 
possible,  to  protect  them  from  damage  liable  to  occur  from  the  unsteady 
movements  of  the  ship  and  other  causes  of  injury  thereto. 

An  enlarged  view  of  the  drag  is  shown  on  page  52.  Its  lower  end  is 
broadened  out,  as  shown,  and  bent  downward  and  forward  so  as  to 
bring  its  mouth  L  in  front  to  cover  as  much  bottom  or  cutting 
surface  as  the  area  of  the  suction  pipe  will  allow — L'  being  a  shield  to 
prevent  the  bend  or  hook  of  the  drag  from  sinking  too  deep  into  the 
dredged  material,  and  also  to  enable  it  to  ride  over  any  unyielding 
obstruction  which  it  might  encounter  when  at  work. 

O  is  an  opening,  provided  with  a  door  for  admitting  water  to  mix 
with  the  sand  or  mud  to  make  them  mobile,  and  so  prevent  the  pump 
from  choking.  This  door  is  always  more  or  less  open  and  adjusted  to 
let  in  more  or  less  water,  as  may  be  required  by  the  quality  of  the 
material  to  be  dredged.  In  dredging  soft  mud  this  door  sometimes  will 
not  admit  sufficient  water  to  prevent  the  choking  of  the  dredging  pump ; 
hence  is  provided  the  relief  door  K',  which  is  to  be  opened  only  when 
some  part  of  the  passage  from  the  mouth  of  the  drag  to  the  pump 
becomes  obstructed,  and  as  soon  as  the  obstruction  is  removed,  is 
again  allowed  to  close.  This  relief  door  is  opened  at  will  by  means  of 
the  rope  y  extending  from  the  lever  k'  to  the  deck  of  the  ship. 


54 


Reasons  why  the  Swash  Channel  of  New  York  Harbor 
Should  be  Improved. 

As  the  Improvement  of  New  York  Harbor,  by  widening  and  deepen- 
ing Gedney's  and  Main  Ship  Channels,  has  been  successfully  accom- 
plished, and  at  an  expense  to  the  Government  not  exceeding  2^/2  per 
cent,  of  the  originally  estimated  cost,  and  as  the  Improvement  of  these 
channels  is  proven  to  be  permanent,  more  and  better  reasons  than  before 
now  present  themselves  to  show  why  the  Swash  Channel  also  should  be 
improved. 

Facility  with  which  the  Swash  Channel  Could  be  Improved. — 
The  loregoing  account  of  the  Improvement  of  the  Main  Ship  and 
Gedney's  Channels  demonstrates  beyond  all  question  the  practicability 
and  feasibility  of  a  timely  and  successful  improvement  of  the  Swash 
Channel,  should  the  Government  conclude  to  have  it  done. 

The  successful  and  satisfactory  Improvement,  by  dredging,  of  the 
Main  Ship  and  Gedney's  Channels,  even  without  the  advantage  of  ex- 
perience on  the  part  of  the  contractors,  and  at  a  cost,  as  before  stated, 
not  to  exceed  23.5  per  cent,  of  the  amount  first  estimated  by  the  Govern- 
ment Engineers,  proves  to  a  certainty  that,  by  similar  means,  the  Swash 
Channel  can  be  as  successfully,  satisfactorily  and  economically  improved, 
and  with  greater  benefit  to  navigation. 

CERTAINTY  OF  THE  PERMANENCY  OF  ITS  IMPROVEMENT. 

As  the  first  appropriation  ($200,000)  was  made  for  the  Improvement 
of  the  bar  lying  in  Gedney's  Channel,  dredging  was  first  begun  in  that 
channel  as  the  test  of  efficiency  of  this  kind  of  work  upon  a  sea-bar. 

Careful  comparative  surveys  made  to  determine  the  question  of  per- 
manency showed  that  so  far  as  the  work  had  been  done,  the  depth  of  the 
channel  was  fully  maintained,   whereupon    dredging   was  continued. 

Other  surveys  for  the  same  purpose,  from  time  to  time  were  made,  and 
which  further  confirmed  the  same  satisfactory  results.  And  so  the 
dredging  went  on  until  the  Improvement  was  completed,  wholly  by 
dredging. 

In  every  instance  test  surveys  show  that  the  attained  depths  of  the 
channels  are  fully  maintained,  and  in  some  places  more  than  maintained, 
to  the  extent  of  several  inches. 


55 


Therefore,  the  question  of  permanency  of  the  work  by  dredging  is 
established  as  regards  the  Main  Ship  and  Gedney's  Channels. 

Hence  it  is  safe  to  conclude  that  the  Swash  Channel,  were  it  similarly 
improved  by  the  same  means,  would  also  maintain  its  depth  and  width. 
Besides,  there  are  other  reasons  to  confirm  this  conclusion  : 

First.  The  Swash  is  not  exposed  to  sedimentary  deposits  from  the 
Raritan  Bay,  as  is  the  lower  portion  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel. 

Second. — It  is  a  shorter  channel-distance  from  the  upper  part  of  the 
Main  Ship  Channel  to  the  ocean,  and,  therefore,  would  be  more  likely 
to  be  scoured  by  the  water  from  the  Narrows,  by  way  of  the  upper  part 
of  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  than  would  be  the  lower  section  of  the  latter 
channel. 

Third.  It  is  a  more  direct  course  between  the  upper  part  of  the 
Main  Ship  and  the  Gedney's  Channels,  than  is  the  Main  Ship  from  its 
upper  union  with  the  Swash  to  the  Gedney's  Channel. 

Fourth.  Surveys  of  the  various  channels  from  as  far  back  as  1835 
show  that  the  Swash  is  in  as  good  condition  as  it  was  56  years  ago. 

Fifth.  The  velocity  of  the  flow  of  water  through  the  Swash  is  twice 
as  rapid  as  it  is  in  the  Main  Ship  Channel  on  the  Knolls,  and  its  flow  is 
nearly  parallel  with  its  axis,  and  the  same  is  true  of  the  Gedney's 
Channel ;  which  also  facilitates  navigation,  while  part  of  the  tide  crosses 
the  axis  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel.  Besides,  the  rate  of  flow  in  the 
Swash  and  Gedney's  Channel  is  the  same. 

In  conformation  of  these  statements,  the  following  is  taken  from  Col. 
McFarland's  report  for  1886  : 

"A  comparison  of  the  survey  made  by  Col.  G.  L.  Gillespie,  Corps  of 
Engineers,  in  1884  (see  Annual  Report  of  the  Chief  of  Engineers  for  1885, 
pages  776  to  785),  with  those  previously  made,  shows  that  the  changes 
which  have  occurred  in  the  channels  since  1835  have  been  very  slight. 

"  The  24-foot  curves  of  the  Main,  Swash,  East  and  Fourteen  Foot 
channels  have  all  moved  slightly  westward  and  southward,  but  still  em- 
brace about  the  same  areas  of  shoals. 

"  But  while,  in  1835,  bars  with  less  than  24  feet  on  them  extended 
completely  across  Gedney's,  the  Main  Ship,  and  the  Swash  Channels, 
these  bars,  at  the  time  of  Colonel  Gillespie's  survey  in  1884  had  nearly 
disappeared,  leaving  in  each  case  only  spots  where  there  was  less  than  24 
feet  of  water. 


56 


"  For  fifty  years,  then,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  natural  tidal  scourr 
which  is  strong  enough  at  the  Narrows  to  maintain  a  channel  a  mile  wide, 
with  depdis  of  100  feet  in  it,  has  been  only  able  below  the  Narrows  to 
maintain  a  3c-foot  channel,  with  two  spots  in  it  where  there  is  24  feet 
depth. 

"  From  current  observations  taken  by  Colonel  Gillespie  in  1884,  it 
appears  that  a  good  deal  of  the  ebb  volume  from  the  Narrows  passes  to 
the  northward  of  the  south  side  of  the  Swash  Channel,  and  that  a  large 
part  of  the  Raritan  Bay  ebb  volume  passes  between  the  south  side  of  the 
Knolls  and  Sandy  Hook,  leaving  a  wedge-shaped  area  at  their  junction 
near  the  Knolls,  over  which  the  rate  of  the  current  is  reduced  about  one- 
half,  and  where  a  part  of  the  current  passes  directly  across  the  channel 
instead  of  along  its  axis." 

"  This  is  also  true  of  the  flood-tide ;  on  the  flood  there  is  the  same 
diminution  of  rate  across  this  area,  and  a  part  of  the  tide  crosses  the 
channel  at  right  angles.  Some  of  the  velocities  observed  by  Colonel 
Gillespie,  in  1884,  in  these  channels,  are  as  follows: 


LOCALITIES. 

Maximum  Ebb, 
Miles  per  Hour. 

Maximum  Flood, 
Miles  per  Hour. 

In  the  Swash  Channel,  abreast  of  the  Roeomer  Beacon  

In  the  deep  hole,  half  way  between  Sandy  Hook  and  Gedney's  

1.60 
0.80 
2,22 
2  00 
1.60 

1. 2 1 
0.65 
1.70  to  1.20 
1-50 
1.30 

"  Both  in  the  Swash  and  in  Gedney's  Channel  the  ebb  current  is 
nearly  parallel  with  the  axis  of  the  channels,  and  from  the  measurements 
so  far  taken  the  relative  ebb  velocities  in  both  channels  appear  to  be  the 
same,  but  the  flood  in  Gedney's  Channel  appears  to  exceed  that  of  the 
Swash  Channel  by  0.09  miles  per  hour. 

"  In  the  spring  of  1872  Brig.-Gen.  (then  Lieut. -Col.)  John  Newton, 
Corps  of  Engineers,  had  a  series  of  current  observations  taken  in  the 
Lower  Bay,  with  the  following  results  : 


PLACE. 

Surface  Velocity, 
in  Miles  per 
Hour. 

Bottom  Velocity, 
in  Miles  per 
Hour. 

2.20 
1.65 
2.00 
2.40 

0  40 
o.yo 
0.40 
0.80 

Main  Channel,  close  to  and  North  of  the  point  of  Sandy  Hook  

These  observations  were  stated  to  have  been  taken  at  the  maximum 
velocity  of  the  ebb  tide. 


57 


From  these  tables  of  velocity  of  currents,  it  is  seen  that  the  flow  is 
more  rapid  in  the  Fourteen  Foot  than  in  the  Swash  Channel,  and  a  hun- 
dred per  cent,  greater  in  the  Swash  than  in  the  Main  Ship  Channel, 
showing  the  tendency  of  the  water  to  take  the  course  of  the  shortest 
distance  from  the  upper  part  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel  to  the  Ocean. 

Advantages  of  its  Position  and  Direction. 

The  question  of  improving  the  Swash  Channel  does  not  imply  the 
substitution  of  the  Swash  for  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  for  were  the  former 
channel  improved  and  employed,  both  ends  of  the  latter  channel  would 
still  be  used  in  conjunction  with  the  Swash  Channel. 

Considering  the  Main  Ship  and  the  Gedney's  Channels,  as  now  im- 
proved, to  be  one  and  the  same  channel  extending  from  the  Narrows  to 
deep  water  of  the  Ocean,  it  will  be  seen  that  while  its  course  from  the 
Narrows  to  Flynn's  Knoll  is  direct,  and  not  seriously  indirect  from  Flynn's 
Knoll  to  the  Ocean,  that  yet  its  course  from  the  Narrows  to  the  Ocean  is 
very  disadvantageous^  indirect. 

By  referring  to  the  map,  page  9,  it  will  be  seen  as  Col.  McFarland 
says,  in  his  report  for  1886,  that : 

"  The  Swash  Channel  is  really  a  cut-oft"  from  the  Main  Ship  Channel,, 
leaving  it  about  six  miles  below  the  Narrows,  and  joining  it  again  at  the 
eastern  end  of  Gedney's  Channel. 

"The  distance  from  the  Narrows  to  30-feet  soundings  outside  the  Bar 
by  the  Main  Ship  Channel  is  15  miles,  and  by  the  Swash  Channel  11 
miles." 

Hence  from  the  Narrows  to  the  Ocean  the  distance  is  four  miles  less 
by  way  of  the  Swash  than  by  the  Main  Ship  Channel. 

The  directions  of  the  Beacon  ranges  of  these  two  channels,  according 
to  the  Government  Chart,  show  that  the  deviation  of  the  Swash  Channel 
from  the  course  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  at  their  upper  union,  is  54 
degrees ;  and  at  their  lower  union  the  deviation  of  the  Swash  from  the 
course  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel  is  61  degrees;  the  sum  of  these  two 
angles  being  115  degrees. 

While  the  two  angles  formed  by  the  Beacon  ranges  in  their  courses 
around  Flynn's  Knoll  is  also  1 15  degrees,  being  50  degrees  and  65  de- 
grees, respectively.  Hence  from  the  Narrows  to  the  inner  mouth  of  Ged- 
ney's Channel,  the  amount  of  deviation  of  the  Beacon  ranges  from  a 


58 

straight  course  is  the  same,  and  the  number  of  angles  or  turns  is  the  same, 
by  way  of  both  channels.  And  there  is  not  a  great  difference  between 
the  magnitude  of  the  several  angles,  the  greatest  being  65  degrees,  and 
the  least  being  50  degrees,  both  in  the  Main  Ship  Channel. 

Col.  McFarland,  referring  to  these  angles,  in  his  report  for  1886,  says  : 
"  At  the  lower  end  of  the  Swash  Channel  it  is  necessary  to  make  quite 
a  sharp  turn  to  the  northward  in  order  to  get  into  the  Gedney's  Channel, 
and  the  turn  from  the  Main  Ship  Channel  into  the  Gedney's  Channel  is 
even  shorter.    More  room  should  be  given  for  vessels  at  these  points." 

ECONOMICAL    ADVANTAGES     OF     THE     SWASH     OVER    THE  SHORT-BEND 
SECTION   OF  THE   MAIN   SHIP  CHANNEL. 

Though  the  items  of  extra  fuel  and  time,  required  by  the  indirection 
of  the  course  of,  and  greater  distance  by  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  may  be 
considered  of  small  account,  nevertheless,  in  view  of  the  increasing  num- 
ber of  larger  ocean  steamers  navigating  these  channels,  and  the  interest 
felt  in  saving  time,  especially  with  that  class  of  steamers  that  are  now 
obliged  to  employ  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  they  are  not  to  be  over- 
looked. 

The  saving  on  these  two  items  of  fuel  and  time,  to  say  nothing  of 
other  advantages,  would  aggregate  a  sum  in  course  of  time  sufficient  to 
pay  the  cost  of  amplifying  the  Swash  Channel  to  a  width  of  a  1,000  feet, 
and  a  depth  of  30  feet  at  mean  low  water. 

An  evidence  of  the  advantages  of  the  Swash  over  the  Main  Ship 
Channel,  is  the  fact  that  it  is  employed  by  nearly  all,  if  not  all,  navigators 
who  are  not  compelled  to  take  the  Main  Ship  Channel  because  of  the 
great  draught  of  their  vessels. 

The  Necessity  of  Improving-  the  Swash  Channel. 

Considering  the  extent  of  ocean  traffic  and  travel,  and  its  rapid  in- 
crease, it  would  seem,  for  convenience  and  safety,  that  that  portion  of  the 
Main  Ship  Channel  which  turns  upon  itself  to  the  extent  of  115  degrees 
around  Flynn's  Knoll  should  be  relieved  of  a  portion,  if  not  all,  of  the 
larger  ocean  vessels  ;  not  only  because  of  the  greater  distance,  incon- 
venience, expense,  loss  of  time  and  danger  attendant  upon  its  navigation, 
but  because  of  its  less  capacity  than  would  be  that  of  the  improved  Swash 
Channel.    The  great  length  and  draught  of  many  steamers  require  so 


59 


large  a  turning  area,  that  in  doubling  Flynn's  Knoll,  or  following  any 
short  turns  of  the  channels,  they  are  liable  to  swerve  from  one  side  of  the 
channel  to  the  other,  causing  increased  liability  of  collision  and  ground- 
ing, as  well  as  diminishing  the  capacity  of  the  channel. 

In  short,  the  relative  safety  and  capacity  of,  and  the  convenience  and 
speed  of  passage  through  a  channel  of  given  width  and  depth,  are  com- 
mensurate with  its  straightness  and  inversely  with  its  length. 

Besides,  the  current  in  the  Swash  Channel  runs  in  line  with  its  axis, 
while  in  that  portion  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel  lying  north  and  south,  the 
current  is  transverse  to  the  axis  of  the  channel,  which  diminishes  the 
facility  of  its  navigation. 

Again,  as  the  great  majority  of  vessels  entering  and  leaving  the  port 
pass  through  the  Swash  Channel,  and  as  in  passing  out  of  this  channel,  at 
either  end,  their  course  is  in  a  direction  diagonal  to  the  axis  of  the  Main 
Ship  Channel  and  therefore,  to  the  course  of  the  larger  ocean  steamers  in 
their  passage  through  the  latter  channel,  it  is  evident  that  this  is  a  source 
of  liability  of  collision  that  would  be  obviated  if  all  vessels  were  running 
in  the  same  general  direction. 

Why  the  Main  Ship  Channel  has  been  Employed  by  the 
Large  Steamers,  and  Their  Effect  on  the  Channel. 

The  Main  Ship  Channel  being  a  trifle  deeper,  as  well  as  some  wider, 
than  the  Swash  Channel,  it  had  been  employed  by  the  larger  steamers, 
and  the  use  of  it  by  these  deep  draught  vessels  had  the  effect  to  keep  it 
open  and  increase  its  depth.  But  as  the  current  in  the  Swash  is  twice  as 
rapid  as  in  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  and  in  line  with,  instead  of  across  its 
axis,  as  well  as  the  distance  being  4  miles  shorter ;  therefore,  had  the  bed 
of  the  Swash  been  disturbed  and  stirred  up  by  the  same  vessels  as  had 
been  the  bed  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel,  it  is  not  certain  that  the  depth 
of  the  Swash  would  not  be  equal  to  that  of  the  Main  Ship  Channel 
before  its  recent  improvement. 

Relating  to  the  effect  of  steamers  in  deepening  the  channels,  Col. 
McFarland,  in  his  report  of  1886,  says: 

"  It  is  common  to  see  vessels  passing  over  the  bar  with  a  wake  500 
to  a  1,000  feet  long  behind  them  of  material  churned  up  from  the  bottom 
by  their  propeller  blades." 


6o 


And  in  his  report  for  1885,  Col.  Gillespie  says  : 

"  The  change  in  the  character  and  draught  of  the  vessels  using  the- 
harbor  during  the  past  thirty  years,  particularly  in  the  last  ten  years,  has 
had  its  influence,  no  doubt,  in  slightly  increasing  the  depth  from  2 1  to  24 
feet  on  the  bar." 

WHY    THE    SWASH     CHANNEL    WAS    NOT     IMPROVED     INSTEAD     OF  THE 
SHORT-BEND  SECTION  OF  THE  MAIN  SHIP  CHANNEL. 

Why  the  Main  Ship  Channel  between  the  upper  and  lower  ends  of 
the  Swash,  instead  of  the  Swash  Channel  itself,  was  improved  may  have 
been,  presumably,  for  the  reasons  that : 

At  the  time  the  Government  concluded  to  improve  New  York  Harbor 
its  Engineers  were  not  clear  as  to  the  best  project  to  present  or  the  best 
course  to  pursue,  not  knowing,  without  trial,  what  would  be  the  result  of 
dredging  as  to  permanency ;  therefore,  they  felt  their  way,  step  by  step, 
by  dredging  ;  believing  at  the  start  that  contraction  would  be  required 
at  last  for  improving  Gedney's  Channel,  and  that  the  result  of  that  part 
of  the  work  which  was  to  be  done  by  dredging  would  be  better  main- 
tained in  the  Main  Ship  than  in  the  Swash  Channel. 

Had  the  Engineers  known  at  the  outset  that  the  entire  work  would 
be  done  by  dredging  alone,  and  had  they  then  known,  as  they  now  do, 
that  the  results  of  dredging  would  be  successful  and  permanent,  possibly 
they  might  have  concluded  that  the  Swash  was  the  preferable  channel  to 
improve. 

As  the  method  of  improving  New  York  Harbor,  was,  therefore,  at 
first  a  subject  of  opinion  and  probabilities  rather  than  of  experience  and 
demonstration,  it  seemed  a  less  experimental  course  to  improve  the  Main 
Ship  rather  than  the  Swash  Channel ;  but  the  project  of  improving  this 
channel  can  now  be  viewed  in  the  light  of  facts  and  experience  which 
did  not  exist  previous  to  the  improvement  of  the  Main  Ship  and  Gedney's 
Channels. 


EXPLANATION  OF  PLATES. 


The  folowing  Plates  are  illustrative  of  the  dredging  steamer  Reliance  : 

Plate  I. — Sheer  plan  of  the  steamer,  showing  arrangement  of  drags  and 
suction  pipes. 

Plate  II. — Longitudinal  section  of  the  steamer,  showing  arrangement 
of  boilers,  propelling  engines,  main  pumping  engines,  dredging 
pumps  and  auxiliary  pumps,  and  hoisting  machinery  and  appliances 
for  operating  drags  and  suction  pipe. 

Plate  III. — General  plan  of  the  steamer,  showing  most  of  the  more 
important  parts,  which  are  designated  on  the  Plate  by  name. 

Plate  IV. — Cross  sections  of  steamer  between  propeller  engines  and 
boilers,  looking  forward  and  aft. 

Plate  V. — General  plan  of  dump  screws,  used  in  connection  with  the 
dredging  steamer  Mount  Waldo. 


t 


